Author: stuart taylor
Date: 02:47:28 03/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 20, 2002 at 01:02:40, Slater Wold wrote: >On March 20, 2002 at 00:56:15, Peter McKenzie wrote: > >>On March 19, 2002 at 19:56:39, enrico carrisco wrote: >> >>>During GM Gulko's post-game analysis of his match with HIARCS 8, a watcher asked >>>Gulko to rate the strength of HIARCS 8 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being >>>Kasparov strength. Gulko gave the rating of 6. >> >>Pretty meaningless because we only have one end of the scale. Sure, 10 is >>Kasparov, but what is 1?? Is it the patzer at the local chess club? Is it a >>random move generator? Is it 2000, 2500, Karpov, Crafty, ... you take your >>pick. > >Well, when you scale something, 1 is always the worst, and 10 is always the >best. > >Just imagine what the "worst" is in Gulko's mind. And I doubt it's Karpov. > >> >>> >>>An odd comparison to say the least, but if anyone can contrast "strength" with >>>Kasparov, it would be Gulko. ;) >>> >>>-elc. The worst would have to be about 0 elo. So anything less than 9, if Kasparov is 10, is bad indeed. S.Taylor
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.