Author: Tim Foden
Date: 11:47:17 04/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 25, 2003 at 14:24:23, Peter Fendrich wrote: >On April 25, 2003 at 06:13:51, Tim Foden wrote: > >>On April 25, 2003 at 04:20:33, Albert Bertilsson wrote: >> >>>Hi! >>> >>>When testing my new engine versions against older versions I use the nice >>>WhoIsBetter tool to determine weather or not the new version is likely to be >>>stronger. >>> >>>But I would also like to know how much stronger. Just an estimation would be >>>nice, just as an reward for the work. Putting the engine on FICS takes to long, >>>so I wonder are there any rules of thumb that I can apply? >>> >>>Like: >>>New engine scores 3 to 2? >> >> 60% = +70.44 ELO. >> >>>New engine scores 2 to 1? >> >> 66.66% = +120.36 ELO. >> >>>New engine scores 3 to 1? >> >> 75% = +190.85 ELO. >>> >>>Regards Albert >> >>Dann Corbit has a tool called USCF which can calculate such numbers. I have a >>modified version here. >> >>Here is a table of outputs which may be useful: >> >>A win percentage of 50% gives a rating difference of +0.00 ELO >>A win percentage of 55% gives a rating difference of +34.86 ELO >>A win percentage of 60% gives a rating difference of +70.44 ELO >>A win percentage of 65% gives a rating difference of +107.54 ELO >>A win percentage of 70% gives a rating difference of +147.19 ELO >>A win percentage of 75% gives a rating difference of +190.85 ELO >>A win percentage of 80% gives a rating difference of +240.82 ELO >>A win percentage of 85% gives a rating difference of +301.33 ELO >>A win percentage of 90% gives a rating difference of +381.70 ELO >> >>Cheers, Tim. > >One can't use this table or ELOSTAT or any other ELO rating formula. >It will produce a figure but it doesn't mean anything. :) I know what you mean... but to be pedantic, I think you really mean shouldn't rather than can't. I.E. I can perfectly easily use this table to make predictions about changes in strengh when there are few games. Thus I demonstably _can_ do it. But I agree that I shouldn't really. And in fact I don't. :) >1) The ELO formula is based on the "Normal distribution" which is just an >estimate of the real distribution. OK. >In order to be used as an estimate you need >something about 30-50 games or more. Again, I disagree. :) It _can_ be used as an "estimate" however many games you have... it just won't be a very accurate one. :) >2) Even if it was a perfect estimate the few games gives a very instable figure. >For instance the difference between 2-2 and 2.5-1.5 gives a big difference in >ELO but represent a very small difference in the results. Very true. Cheers, Tim.
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.