Author: Mark Young
Date: 14:58:10 08/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2003 at 16:31:55, George Tsavdaris wrote: >On August 24, 2003 at 16:15:44, Mike Byrne wrote: > >>On August 24, 2003 at 13:12:14, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1141 >> >>"Nevertheless, 11 games is a pretty good sample" >> >>I have never seen 11 games be a good sample. When you start playing games >>against the same opponent, you will have a an excpetional strong 11 game string >>and an exceptional weak game string. It takes hundred of games to raise the >>confidence level and narrow the range to get any comfort at all. > >I could never expect from a statistician to say such a thing! >(Of cource with "pretty good" he could mean "bad", but i don't think that). > >And moreover he calculates a rating for the chess engine called: Shredder! >That means he combines the performance of different Shredder chess engines: >Shredder 6/6.02/.../7 for having an ELO of Shredder. Although one can say >this can be done, if we think Shredder as a person with learning ability, >like a human which improving along the years, but i disagree and i find >this dubious, as Shredder 7.04 is totally different to Shredder-6. Yes I find this dubious also...My guess would be Shredder 7.04 is the strongest against humans and computers. Also hardware was not factored in with the results. I think Junior has more games on faster hardware then Shredder 6 thur 7.04. I am not even sure Shredder 7.04 has any games against humans. In the two tournaments I think Shredder 7 was playing not Shredder 7.04...anyone know for sure?
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.