Author: ALI MIRAFZALI
Date: 13:57:27 02/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2002 at 16:48:53, Albert Silver wrote: >On February 22, 2002 at 16:46:30, Albert Silver wrote: > >>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. > > >Oh yes, and one more thing: the highest rating possible has nothing to do with >the TC. 100% is 100%. > > Albert It has everything to do with it.There is nothing above 3300 theoretical or otherwise.
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.