Author: Angrim
Date: 00:52:07 02/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2002 at 18:27:14, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 22, 2002 at 17:18:04, Angrim wrote: > >>On February 22, 2002 at 14:21:01, Paul Doire wrote: >> >>>When chess is "figured out" what ELO will that equate to? >>> >>>Paul >> >>This depends on which rating pool you are measuring it in. >>Also depends on if the result of the perfect game is a draw or >>a win for white. In either case, you can not rationally expect >>that the perfect player will always win, especially if it is >>playing a series vs an opponent who can learn. >> >>Given that, here is one implausable scenario in which the >>answer can actually be calculated. >>Assume that this perfect player is playing on ICC, and that it >>always wins, and that the top-rated players are actually >>willing to play it, and that the top rated players don't have their >>ratings change any from what they are today at 3pm.. >> >>then its rating would be: >>standard: 2839+720=3559 >>blitz: 3460+720=4180 >>bullet: 3167+720=3887 >> >>This is based on the following from an ICC help file: >>This formula has the property that if both players are established then the >>sum of the rating changes is zero. It turns out that if the rating difference >>is more than 719 points, then if the strong player wins, there is no change in >>either rating. >>So given all of the unlikely assumptions that I listed, the >>perfect player would be rated 719 points higher than the second best player. > >What if there are a thousand players, each one dominating over the one beneath? >If the bottom player is 0, then the top 719,000? > >What if the lowest rated player is at 4000? 40,000, 4e100? I take it that you did not bother to read my post before you replied to it. Angrim
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.