Author: Chris Carson
Date: 04:38:31 06/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2002 at 07:18:25, GuyHaworth wrote: > >There are ELO rating lists for: > > people (on the basis of human-human games ... FIDE-managed), and > computers (on the basis of computer-computer games) > >There are apparently some intrinsic problems with rating schemes, maybe >particularly ELO which was the first, and I am looking for more information on >this. > >Each list would be equally valid if N ELO points were subtracted from all >participants ... so the absolute numbers mean nothing. Ok, that would be easy >to fix if there were rated people-computer games. So .... > >... is there an ELO list purely on the basis of computer-human games. Tony (tester with SSDF) has SSDF calibration (human vs computer) and my human vs computer lists. These are all the rated FIDE standard games/ELO ratings. http://home.interact.se/~w100107/welcome.htm My thanks to Tony. > >I have also heard that there is an 'inflation effect' with ELO. What is this - >and has anyone an 'ELO game simulator' to demonstrate this? I would expect that >there are more games played in SSDF to rate the engines than contribute to the >FIDE human ELO ratings: is this correct? If so, I'd expect the inflation >effect in the SSDF list to be greater. > >Would it be good to get the Kramnik-DeepFritz computer rated in SSDF as well as >having its match rating against Kramnik? Presumably ChessBase are able to rate >it against Fritz engines in SSDF. > >Finally, are there better rating schemes than ELO - or are they just different. > >g
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.