Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 14:58:02 04/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 10, 2002 at 16:13:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 09, 2002 at 16:04:01, Dann Corbit wrote: > > >one quick note. You are falling into the same "trap" that 99% of the >people here fall into... treating the "rating" as "absolute". It is not. >You should compare the rating of (say) 1996 chessmaster to 1996 genius, >then compare the 2002 ratings for both and see if the "spread" has >changed much. If it has, something is wrong. If it has not, then the >Elo system is working perfectly... > >The absolute rating probably should drop since new and more skilled players >are entering the "pool" each year... But the spread between two programs >should not change significantly... Why would the spread change if they still use the same formula? The difference in elo between players is just related to the win/lose ratio between them, so the spread should stay fixed if the win/lose ratio remains the same. Of cause the scale could drift up or down, but since programs perform at a constant level, we do have a tool to correct for that. As I suggested in a different post, one could simply take a group of programs, find their average and make sure that average remains constant. It would be far better with a large group than just one or two programs, much smaller errorbars on the "absoluteness" of the scale. -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.