Author: pavel
Date: 22:52:58 09/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2002 at 18:47:40, Peter Fendrich wrote:
>>
>>What I am saying is that, since the games are being played randomly and
>>opponents are random.
>>IF Shredder6 is to play another 107 games (which is the differance between the
>>number of games played by player1 and player2) with lower rated players, and
>>Fritz7 is to just sit there and play no games (since it already played more
>>games), chances are (very much) that Shredder6 would cross Fritz7.
>
>Something is wrong here (if you aren't thinking of some specific players).
>Shredder6 has to get relatively much better results vs lower rated players than
>vs equal players in order to raise his rating. I can't see why it's easier to
>raise your rating vs lower rated players than others.
I see your point.
And I understand from your post and "Maurizio De Leo's" post that it gets harder
to achieve higher rating by winning against lower rated programs.
I knew that.
But how lower rated?
I was talking about Crafty, Older versions of Fritz and some similar lower rated
players in the SSDF.
Their rating:
Rating
21 Crafty 18.12/CB 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2613
20 Fritz 6.0 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2619
Shredder6 rating is :
2 Shredder 6.0 Paderb 256MB Athlon 1200 2727
Rating differance around 100-110.
Enough differance not to have impact on the rating list if Shredder6 gets to win
significant amount of games against such "lower bound" programs?
We are talking about 107 game here...
>>
>>I don't think that human rating is "realistic".
>>I don't think Kasparov is a 2800+ rated player, for what it's worth.
>
>...and I have no opinion really... :-)
Ofcourse that was just an opinion. ;)
>
>Mvh
>Peter
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.