Author: blass uri
Date: 12:24:53 11/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 1998 at 10:24:40, Joe T. Pangilinan wrote: >On November 17, 1998 at 16:59:38, Joe T. Pangilinan wrote: > >>Computer Chess MAGAZINE: Selective Search >> >>RATINGS UPDATED: 24/Sep 1998 >>My first involvement in Computer Chess appeared as an article in Mike Basman's >>Magazine 'Popular Chess', in which I suggested that the manufacturers were >>over-rating their Computers 'somewhat', and brought such a large response that I >>decided to pursue the matter further. I subsequently started my Magazine in >>1985, then known as 'The Computer Chess News Sheet', and my current readership >>is a fairly steady 350. >>In some ways the RATING LIST remains a key to the Magazine, but all matters >>relating to Computer Chess are covered, including Articles and Reviews of latest >>machines and programs, 'Best-Buy' Guides, Tournament and Match results with >>games and analysis, occasional contributions by Programmers and leading Players, >>discussion on Computer Progress, Playing Styles, plus Readers' contributions, >>and much more. It is produced bi-monthly, and always includes updated and >>separate Rating Lists for Dedicated computers (top 100) and PC programs (top >>48). >>I maintain a 'Top Ten' coverage here, updating it from time to time. The >>MAGAZINE Listings have more details, including Ratings from games/matches v. >>human opposition, so I hope Internet users will consider subscribing to it, as >>income I receive from 'SELECTIVE SEARCH' is an important part of my livelihood! >>SELECTIVE SEARCH RATINGS >>Each computer/program's rating figure is calculated by combining its >>computer-v-computer results WITH its results against graded players in proper >>tournaments. The level of the finished List is determined by the results v >>graded players. Of course more computer-v-computer games are played than those >>v-humans, as it is physically and financially impossible to obtain the number of >>games of the latter type that we would wish. >>We are aware that gradings from computer-v-computer results do not always match >>those of a computer-v-humans, because a program CAN be prepared specifically to >>do its best against other computers, OR it can be programmed to do its best >>against humans! The latter is what the USER will always want, but programmers >>inevitably have one eye on our Rating Lists, and are aware of the preponderance >>of computer-v-computer games which helps produce them! Even so, my view is that >>to have this type of Computer Rating List as an attempted measure for the >>programmers and other interested parties, and as a guide for prospective >>purchasers, is BETTER than to have no list at all, especially as SELECTIVE >>SEARCH combines all results! >>(Please also note that the results on which my Ratings are based do include, >>with permission, all the SSDF results). >>As the calculations combine SO MANY types of results, I hope that they achieve a >>high level of accuracy. The Ratings are initially calculated in British BCF >>figures, before being converted to Elo figures using the formula (BCF * 8) + 600 >>= Elo. >>The TOP RATINGS, including as far as possible all of the NEWEST PC programs and >>dedicated CHESS COMPUTERS, are:- >>PC PROGRAMS >>Ratings are based on Pentium Pro/MMX machines at 200-233MHz. >>..............BCF.Elo...Program >>250 2603 Fritz5 >>248 2589 Nimzo98 >>248 2585 Hiarcs6 >>245 2566 Rebel9 >>245 2560 Rebel8 >>244 2559 MChess Pro7 >>243 2549 MChess Pro6 >>243 2545 Chess Genius5 >>241 2530 Shredder2 >>239 2513 Gandalf3 >>234 2476 Junior4.6 >>231 2448 Kallisto2 >>227 2421 CS-Tal >>Others of interest, on Pentium/133 machines, which = a loss of approx. 80 Elo: >>[229 2435 Junior4.0] I understand that Junior4's rating on pentium200-233 is 2435+80=2515 when Junior4.6's rating is 2476 It does not seem logical Uri
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.