Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: A question about statistics...

Author: Mike Byrne

Date: 10:01:59 01/04/04

Go up one level in this thread

>On January 04, 2004 at 12:40:00, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>>On January 04, 2004 at 12:29:15, Mark Young wrote:
>>If you concede this point you don't understand. There is no magic number like
>>200 or 2000. The score must be considered. Here is an example:
>>A score of 17 - 3 in a 20 game match has a certainty of over 99% that the winner
>>of the match is stronger then the loser.
>>A 100 game match ending 55 - 45 only has a 81% chance that the winner of the
>>match is the stronger program.
>>A 200 game match ending 106 - 94 only has a 78 % chance that the winner is
>>stronger then the loser.
>Nothing you have said is really correct because you have ignored the significant
>effect of draws in a match.

Statistically Mark is 100% correct.  When you draw a game , the impact of that
counts in your rating.  So I am not sure what you are saying.  Wins, Losses ,
Draws - they all count for statiscal purposes - Because ther are significant.
Perhaps you misunderstood Mark - his 17-3 score above could be 14+ 0- 6= or  17+
3- 0=  , he's just stating the score in point format - 1 point for  a win, 1/2
poing for a draw and 1 point for a loss.  So perhaps this was just a

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.