Author: karen Dall Lynn
Date: 14:13:24 01/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2002 at 16:52:38, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 25, 2002 at 16:46:38, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: > >>I would like to know the opinion of the readers of this forum on the following >>questions. >>1.What would be the Elo rating of the perfect chessplayer? > >Depends on whether or not he's playing against another perfect player. If he >wins 100% of his games, his ELO is infinite. If he plays another perfect player >and draws 100%, then his ELO is anywhere from 1 to any arbitrary huge number >(same as his opponent) depending on how you seeded the calculation. > >>2.Are there natural limits to the strenght that can be achieved in chess >>for a computerchess player? (Not the present centuary but in any future;that >>is what I mean by natural limits). > >If you calculate to the end of the game, you cannot improve on that. I don't >think we'll see that happen real soon. > >>3.If the rating of perfect player is say x ;what would be the rating of >>the stongest computer player ever(that is the best chessprogram that can be >>ever contructed useing computer technology) .It would be x-?.Or would it be x? > >It would be zero, unless it was perfect also. The perfect player would win >every game and get all the ELO points. The imperfect player would lose all the >games and get an ELO of zero. We have a cauculus problem here. Neither the all perfect player's rating would be infinite, nor the all imperfect player would be zero, because both of them would not win or lose all games all of a sudden in an atemporal medium; it is rather a progression obeying rules of progression as time coordinates increases. Not every sum of infinite steps is infinite and not every subtraction of infinite decreases is zero. Karen
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.