Author: Günther Simon
Date: 12:17:21 08/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2001 at 10:07:09, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 24, 2001 at 08:42:52, Günther Simon wrote: > >>On August 24, 2001 at 07:51:16, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:29:21, Günther Simon wrote: >>> >>>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:15:30, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 24, 2001 at 07:06:51, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Here are the results by >>>>>>elostat program >>>>>> >>>>>>You can see that shredder is only 3th place micro based on the performance. >>>>>>Shredder is the world Micro champion by definition but Tiger and Rebel had a >>>>>>better performance. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>1 Deep Junior 7 : 2745 228 281 9 88.9 % 2384 22.2 % >>>>>>2 Quest (DeepFritz) : 2550 266 169 9 66.7 % 2430 44.4 % >>>>>>3 Chess Tiger 14.6 Gambit Tiger : 2499 291 229 9 55.6 % 2461 22.2 % >>>>>>4 Crafty 18.10X : 2467 291 165 9 55.6 % 2428 44.4 % >>>>>>5 Rebel : 2466 291 229 9 55.6 % 2428 22.2 % >>>>>>6 Shredder : 2466 266 249 9 66.7 % 2346 22.2 % >>>>>>7 Goliath : 2421 291 165 9 55.6 % 2382 44.4 % >>>>>>8 Gromit 3.9.5 : 2364 278 201 9 61.1 % 2285 33.3 % >>>>>>9 Ferret : 2359 291 229 9 55.6 % 2320 22.2 >>>>>>%10 Gandalf 5.0 : 2310 291 229 9 55.6 % 2271 22.2 >>>>>>% >>>>>>11 ParSOS : 2256 291 229 9 55.6 % 2217 22.2 % >>>>>>12 Diep : 2227 165 291 9 44.4 % 2265 44.4 % >>>>>>13 IsiChess X : 2166 201 278 9 38.9 % 2245 33.3 % >>>>>>14 Tao : 2165 229 291 9 44.4 % 2203 22.2 % >>>>>>15 Ruy Lopez : 2118 366 266 9 33.3 % 2238 0.0 % >>>>>>16 Pharaon : 2082 169 266 9 33.3 % 2202 44.4 % >>>>>>17 SpiderGirl : 2014 213 255 9 27.8 % 2180 33.3 % >>>>>>18 XiNiX : 1724 400 108 9 5.6 % 2216 11.1 % >>>>>> >>>>>>congratulation also for the Deep Junior team for winning the event convincingly >>>>>>when the difference from the second place is almost 200 elo and the hardware >>>>>>explain less than 70 elo difference. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>>I can add that I think that it may be a better idea to use elostat to decide >>>>>about the world champion in the future. >>>>> >>>>>I know that a lot of people are going to disagree but it is my opinion. >>>>>I prefer a complicated method that does more justive and not a simple method. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>Sorry Uri - but this is really nonsens. >>>>You cant use ELO-Stat on a Swiss Tournament with 9 rounds as >>>>it is described by the author. ELO-Stat is designed to calculate >>>>ratings out of a pool of unknown rated progs with a very very lot >>>>of games. >>>>Therefor if you take a closer look at your table you would see that >>>>the error margin is at least 435!pts (Pharaon) and max 632!! (RuyLopez). >>>>And would you really believe Parallel SOS to be at 2256? :)) >>> >>>The question is not which program is better. >>>competitions of 9 rounds are not supposed to answer this question. >>> >>>The question is which program did better result. >>>The elostat answer this question better than the ranking >>> >>>The rating is also based on average of 2300 if I remember corectly and should >>>not be compared with humans. >>> >>> >>>>You must be a strong Tigerfan to post this very unlike post, as it >>>>is diametral to all your previous posts about stats?! >>> >>>I do not see contradiction with previous posts of myself. >>> >>>>(Btw hasnt Shredder won against Tiger or am I out of memory?) >>> >>>Yes >>>Shredder won against tiger. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>Perhaps we have to accept that in this kind of WCHs luck always seems >>to play a strong role...? > >I accept it but I think that using elotest reduce slightly the luck factor amd >the chances of the best single processor to win the elo stat competition is >slightly better than the chances of the best single to win the ranking >competition. > >>Another question: How much Multi-CPUs had Shredder and Tiger played? > >Tiger played against 5 parallel programs when shredder played against 4 parallel >programs. >I do not say it because I like tiger but because these are the facts. > >I also can add that my post was not because I am a tiger fun but because I think >that tiger's result is slightly better than shredder's result. > >The main program that I use is Deep Fritz and not tiger and I believe that Deep >Fritz is the best. > >Uri What would be the result if we use the ratings which are already known by the SSDF (even when the versions that had played the WCC are NOT the same as were tested yet by the SSDF I would trust the basic numbers more than to SET all programms as totally unknown and equal ~2300 in the beginning) and try a prog which is able to calculate tournaments out of given ratings? I dont have such a program but maybe someone could do sth like that? Btw I would be very interested in getting such a (freeware)prog as I think it is much better to calculate ratings dynamically and not static as I feel always somehow awkward that all participants must be in the mathimatically range of the basic number of rating... Another mention: most Chess servers now use GLICKO-based systems for calculating ratings not the ELO-system. As far as I know it uses much more dynamically information as e.g. some weight for the time which is gone after the last game etc. Günther
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.