Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 09:34:09 09/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 07, 2002 at 01:52:58, pavel wrote: >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. Ok, Shredder6 has to get about 2/3 of the games in order to keep up with his rating. >Enough differance not to have impact on the rating list if Shredder6 gets to win >significant amount of games against such "lower bound" programs? I'm still not with you here. Are you implying that: 1) The difference 110 ELO is wrong and that Shredder6 or Crafty+Fritz has errors in their ratings? 2) The ratings are ok but Shredder6 has especially easy to play against these two engines? (Meaning that the reusults will be better than 2/3 of the games) >We are talking about 107 game here... We can agree on that playing 107 games against only one player is not a good idea. Different opponents is the Doctor's prescription.... >>> >>>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.