Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:37:03 08/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2001 at 15:17:21, Günther Simon wrote: >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? two problems: 1)Not all the programs in WMCCC were tested by the ssdf. 2)The hardware was not equal when the hardware is equal in the ssdf games. Uri
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.