Author: George Sobala
Date: 19:23:44 07/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 25, 2003 at 17:28:23, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 25, 2003 at 17:15:34, George Sobala wrote: > >>On July 25, 2003 at 15:39:55, Matthew Hull wrote: >> >>>======================================================================== >>>Wannabe: Any ICC computer account owner who is not the programmer of the >>>engine/engines running in their account. >>>======================================================================== >>> >>>All non-programmer-owned computer accounts -- as a requirement for having a >>>rated computer account on ICC -- must play in at least [fillin the blank] number >>>of Weekly ICC Wannabe Equalizer (WIWE, pronounced "wee-wee") >>>blitz/standard/whatever events per [month, quarter, 6 months, whatever] in order >>>to retain their ratings. Failure to meet these requirements will cause the >>>account to: >>> >>>-- lose it's ratings >>>-- be limited to unrated games for [fill in the period of time] >>>-- (whatever else) >>> >>>The purpose of the WIWEs is to keep the rating system in some sense of >>>equalibrium. Accounts MUST play whoever/whatever enters the event, which, since >>>it will be a computer requirement, will be computers, plus perhaps whoever else >>>wants to play. >>> >>>A possible side benefit might be that it could actaully be fun. >> >>I am not the programmer of the engine I run (though I did write the settings) >> >>I am not bothered by its rating. >> >>I have no interest in playing other computers. >> >>So where does your suggestion leave me??? > >It leaves you to play unrated games. > >> >>ICCs current policy is liberal. People do as they wish with their accounts, >>which they pay good money for. Why turn fascist? Why get hung up about ratings? > >If you pay money only for games and if your opponents also pay only for games >then there is no problem because you can continue to play with them unrated >games. > >Uri But I don't want to play unrated games. I can play unrated games without paying by using a guest account. I pay for the privilege of playing rated games. Why? Because (a) then I know roughly the calibre of the opponent I am playing (b) they know roughly the calibre of the engine's strength. This way I get to see interesting games of approximately equally matched opponents. I also get to fine tune the settings I am using against humans - not interested in results against comps (although maybe this takes me out of the "Wannabee" category). And note that fine-tuning doesn't in this case mean "trying to maximize the rating" - I am actually dumbing down the program to make it suitable for a strong amateur. The rating system has many uses _other_ than measuring the size of your computer's (ahem) appendage and trying to show that yours is bigger than everyone else's. Which sadly seems to be the motivation behind this suggestion. (Sadder still, it is an attempt to be "fair" about it, better to just ignore the silly people who use the rating system this way.) The function of the ICC is to allow people to play chess, not to determine who has the best hardware.
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.