Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: A question about statistics...

Author: Ricardo Gibert

Date: 10:56:30 01/04/04

Go up one level in this thread

On January 04, 2004 at 13:01:59, Mike Byrne wrote:

>>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

Have look at my response to Peter Berger:

This page took 0.01 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.