Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 03:47:16 11/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 24, 2003 at 23:18:35, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>Whether we get 2% draws or 98% draws says nothing about what happens in the >>remaining 98% respectively 2% of the games, and that *only that* is what we are >>interested in. > >That's a problem, IMHO. IE I get sick and lose one set. Am I _really_ >worse, when we have played 1000 sets all to draws? Definitely, but probably bot by a very large margin, however the question isn't about margins. >>> Particularly since we are dealing with >>>humans and computers that can "get sick". Suppose on a normal day we >>>can only draw, but I get sick and lose 6 in a row. You conclude you >>>are better. You are wrong. The 1000 draws are much more representative >>>of how we compare than the 6 wins/losses, in this case. >> >>You are mixing up the two question because you feel that being 0.001 better is >>being equal, and it isn't in a mathematical sense. > >If we played at the same level _every_ set, game or match, I'd agree. Good, so at least we must be agreeing now as far as the engines go!? :) >But >humans don't do that. with 1000 draws and 1 win I would _not_ say the person >with the 1 win is better, in any way... Do you think statistics care whether the subjects are humans or computers? When you've said A, you must say B. :) -S.
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.