Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 16:41:14 07/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 09, 2003 at 19:12:13, Keith Ian Price wrote: >The rating only tells about strength difference when compared to another in the >same pool. So it is the rating difference that's important. You cited me correctly. > The lack of >importance as to the rating is whether it is 2800+ or 2700+, where the >percentage difference between 40 point differences would be small. If someone >were to say it should be 1000 instead of 2800, then it would be arguable that it >is not meaningless, but no one I've heard from is suggesting that. As an addition: a 40 point difference between players tells you something about winning/losing chances for both. AFAIK the Elo system doesn't make a difference in those chances; it's regardless of the Elo number. So I could answer my own question with "no, a certain rating has no meaning of its own." However, the 2800 rating has some value as it also informs you about increased performance (not equal to "strenght") A _raise_ in 40 points compared to other opponents in the pool means its performance was raised also. If the pool is big enough and there are plenty of games, letting enter a strong player won't significantly lower the ratings of the others (who keep the same performance between each other), but can give a higher rating for the new one; like a new version of an engine In that case the higher rating also tells you that the performance equals more strenght. The 2800+ line might be arbitrary, but with a pool big enough that 2800+ rating can both tell you something about performance raise as well as strenght growth. J.
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.