Author: Ulrich Tuerke
Date: 05:30:55 11/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 2002 at 04:52:10, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 17, 2002 at 02:50:30, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On November 17, 2002 at 02:31:06, Tony Werten wrote: >> >>>Yes, but that's not the point. If you loose this way, your opponent cannot say >>>he didn't have any competition. >> >>I think we differ in opinion on that. I don't consider 'almost lost' >>games to 'count' for this :) >> >>>Now, the bookmaker and operator said they did have a hard time, it's just the >>>man selling this product that said there was no competition. ( Spoken like a >>>true salesman, thus not quite correct) >> >>I think the issue is if Chess Tiger wins, then it's no big deal because >>it's the expected result and the competition were 2nd rank engines >>anyway (see discussions after NK). If it doesn't win then we get the >>'OMG Chess Tiger didn't win! The amateurs are so strong! ChessTiger >>sucks/plays too passive/...' stuff. >> >>No incentive to compete. > >I do not agree > >If tiger gets more than 90% then it is a result that is more than expected. > >Even 80% may be more than the expected result and it is dependent on the >opponents. Come on Uri. Who really cares for the percentages ? Most people don't look to the hardware used neither. It's just one glance to the final ranking. > >I believe that the expected result of Tiger against Crafty is less than 80%. > Of course ! Even an engine like Comet will score more than 30% (at longer time controls). >People can calculate the expected result of Tiger based on the opponents and >decide if the result is a success or a failure not based on the ranking. But they (most of them) will not do. It's just "win it or forget it". > >Uri Uli
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.