Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 05:16:14 03/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 03, 2002 at 07:52:43, Uri Blass wrote: >>I think is is more interesting to ask these question at the higher plies. > >I think that you prefer to ask questions that are practically impossible to >answer. Well, yours is pretty far fetched also ;) >We cannot play games at 20,21,22 plies today. I suppose a million games to ply three is more realistic ;) >I think that before asking the question about the rating of the perfect player >we need to ask if rating has a clear meaning. > >The rating is based on some assumption about the expected result of A against C >based on the expected result of A against B and the expected result of B against >C. > >This assumption is based on the normal distribution and not on games. >It is possible that we can get better assumption by playing games in the way >that I suggest. > >suppose A1 beats A0 600-400 >A2 beats A1 600-400.... >A1000 beat A999 600-400 > >We may assume that the rating of A0 is 0. > >The question is what is the rating of A1000 and if we can expect the same rating >for A1000 if we are going to play only 500 matches(A2 against A0,A4 against >A2...A1000 against A998) > >Uri I'm guessing there would be 0.1 elo difference between A1000 and A999, you need more than 500 games to reveal that within the standard diviation. In principle the list should be ordered as A1,A2,....A1000, you will probably see some strange things like A500 beating A523, so I'm not sure what you hope to prove by this experiment. -S.
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.