Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 10:39:10 10/06/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 2003 at 08:57:10, Uri Blass wrote: >It already happened. >Look at the blitz rating on ICC. >These numbers have no meaning These numbers _do_ have meaning, as they do the job they're developed for: indicating _differences_ in strenght. It even tells you something about winning/losing chances. As long as people stay fixed at ratings as indications of absolute strenght they will tell you that these numbers have no meaning. > and it is not clear that 2700 fide of today is > going to be equivalent to 2700 of the future. It is perfectly clear that the 2700 Fide rating is _not_ going to be equivalent to Elo 2700 in the future, because ratings mean something different in a different pool of players. In _actual_ life these ratings will not fluctuate with hundreds of points because of a gradual overlap of player pools, but the system is not developed to compare 2700 players from 1975 with 2700 players from 2015. >The only way to give meaning to the numbers is to allow a fixed >software+hardware(it should be not derministic so players will be unable to >learn a fixed way to win against it) to play when it get a fixed rating and >other players get rating relative to it but thanks to fide computers are not >allowed to play so this option is not going to happen. You mean the only way to give them meaning to _you_, or maybe as soon as is decided that the Elo numbers indicate an absolute strenght. In that case the Elo calcualtion algorithm should be different; the current calculation is _not_ able to calculate absolute numbers, and _not_ designed for it. 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.