Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Easier to defeat a 1650 computer than a 1650 human.

Author: Will Singleton

Date: 09:23:11 10/23/98

Go up one level in this thread



On October 23, 1998 at 11:51:35, Peter Hegger wrote:

>I'm about a 1650 player at ICC.  Handle is "abel2" I have noticed in my games
>against some weaker computer programs (wimpB, xeniac etc..) that about 65% of
>the time I score the full point. These programs pretty much average about the
>same rating as I do. When it comes to playing humans of about the same calibre
>I'm losing 65% of my games. Am I alone in being  better at playing machines than
>humans? Has anyone else noticed the same thing?
>I also wonder if a GM, given the choice of playing either a 2500 computer or a
>2500 human at 40/2, which would he/she choose?
>BTW, I have about 400 games at ICC and 90% are blitz. Is that a large enough
>sampling to be statistically relevent?
>Thanks
>Peter


First off, since 90% of your games are blitz, and your blitz rating is 1569, how
does that make you a 1650 player?

2nd, are you on strike or do they play chess at the factory? :)

3rd, how do you know your percentages of wins/losses vs humans and computers?
Do you log every game?  Perhaps there's an ICC command to display these kind of
stats; what is it?

Some people are better at playing computers than other, but it usually gets
reflected in the ratings.

Will



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.