Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 13:11:26 10/06/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 2003 at 12:30:54, Dann Corbit wrote: >On October 06, 2003 at 11:05:41, GuyHaworth wrote: > >> >>As many said previously, the absolute numbers mean nothing: it is the >>difference between the ELO numbers for two players that indicates relative >>strength. >> >>But I assume your question is posed about the rating system as it is now, not as >>it might be with a hypothetical 200 added (in which the answer is "It has been >>done already"). >> >>If a 'perfect player' starts off with a rating of 1500' and wins all its games, >>playing at each stage someone with its own rating (or the next one down), I >>wonder how long it would take before it was playing GK at the top, and then how >>long it would take to get to round numbers like 2900, 3000 etc. >> >>In fact, I do not know if there is an upper ELO limit, an asymptote for its ELO >>score. > >There is no asymptote. If (for instance) a player won 90.90909% of his games >from a pool of 2700 players, then the Elo of that player would be 2700 + 400 = >3100 > >If (against the same pool) the 2700 players managed only 1e-5 % of the points, >then the Elo would be 2700 + 2800 = 5500 OK, you've given me a new life's goal: get my rating up to 5500. ;-)
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.