Author: Albert Silver
Date: 13:46:30 02/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2002 at 16:39:12, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote:
>On February 22, 2002 at 16:24:15, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On February 22, 2002 at 16:22:00, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote:
>>
>>>On February 22, 2002 at 16:04:24, Albert Silver wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 22, 2002 at 15:52:59, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I work in the area known as Analysis.Anyway this is how I came up with the
>>>>>300 number.I think it is just a good rule of thumb ( I have not still conducted
>>>>>any experiments yet) .For example many comps action rated by the USCF have
>>>>>action ratings 200 above the slow 40/2 rating.I merely added 100 to the action
>>>>>rating to get the blitz .Nothing fancy.
>>>>
>>>>So you're saying that if a perfect player beats Kasparov 100% of the time at
>>>>40/2 it will be rated 3300, if it beats him 100% at g/30 it will be rated 3500,
>>>>and if it beats him 100% of the time in Blitz it will be rated 3600? I suppose
>>>>that it gets more perfect the faster it plays?
>>>>
>>>> Albert
>>>No actually this is not what I am saying.A perfect player will not beat Kasparov
>>>100% of the time.Due to the power of HUman INTUITION there are many
>>>ways that can lead to a draw (for a plyer of Kasparovs caliber using intuition).
>>>There is NO doubt that Kasparov will lose a MATCH to the perfect player.Back
>>>to the point : Most Computers have ratings of 200 more in action chess then they
>>>do in 40/2.This of course does not mean they are getting stronger .But it
>>>does mean this:Take this example(this is only an example!!!!!!!!!) the NOVAG
>>>Saphire has an action rating of 2383 .This means that a human rated 2383 by the
>>>USCF will be even with this machine in action chess over a series of games .
>>>But the formula says that in 40/2 the rating is only 2183.The same human would
>>>then come up ahead in a match at 40/2.
>>
>>Then the human is breaking the forumla, isn't he/she? Or is it the machine?
>>Probably never took the right math class.
>Are you denying the fact the Computers have higher action rating then 40/2
>ratings? these are known facts.Breaking what formula?
*Sigh* The theoretical maximum rating would be to score 100% against the highest
current rating, in this case Kasparov's. This theoretical maximum can change as
the highest rating moves up or down. Perfect play MAY be the highest _practical_
rating, but not the highest _theoretical_ rating. The highest _theoretical_
rating is of course 100% against Kasparov, or whomever the highest rating may
belong to.
Albert
This page took 0.01 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.