Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 11:31:59 01/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 23, 2004 at 14:20:43, Christophe Theron wrote: >On January 23, 2004 at 07:08:07, Kolss wrote: > >>On January 22, 2004 at 12:53:16, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On January 21, 2004 at 20:00:12, Kolss wrote: >>> >>>>Hi, >>>> >>>>How many games you need depends on what you want to show, of course... :-) >>>>If my calculations are correct, I get the following: >>>> >>>>Shredder 8 vs. Shredder 7.04: >>>> >>>>+90 -65 =145 >>>> >>>>=> 162.5 - 137.5 >>>> >>>>=> 54.17 % >>>> >>>>=> >>>>Elo difference = +29 >>>>95 % confidence interval: [+1, +58] >>>> >>>>That means that based on this 300-game match (for this particular time control >>>>on this particular computer with these particular settings etc.), your best >>>>guess is that S8 is 29 Elo points better than S7.04 (highest likelihood for that >>>>value); there is a 95 % chance that S8 is between 1 and 58 Elo points better; >>>>and the likelihood that S8 is (at least 1 Elo point) better than S7.04 is 97.5 >>>>%. >>>> >>>>So if you "only" want to show that S8 is better, you can - statistically >>>>speaking - stop now. If you want to "prove" that it is more than 20 Elo points >>>>better, you need a few more games indeed... >>>> >>>>Best regards - Munjong. >>> >>> >>> >>>It's great to see that at least one guy is able to correctly interpret match >>>results here. >>> >>>I hope you will post more often on this subject. Information on it is very much >>>needed here. >> >>Well, as my former English teacher used to say: >> >>"I'm talking to the trees - but they aren't listening to me..." :-) >> >>I guess some people just don't bother trying to consult a *basic* statistics >>book before jumping on you... ;-) >> >>Best regards - Munjong. > > > >Please don't leave the forum and help me educate people! :) > >Actually people do not need to understand all the maths behind the stats (I >don't myself), but just to understand a few basics. For example that a 10 games >match tells mostly nothing. > > > > Christophe Imagine yourself playing a 10 game rated match against one of your peers [someone who sneers and blows smoke in your face] and suppose you lost all ten games? You would then think the match meant a lot! One step away from that would be when the match were played between your chess program and someone else's. Your program would be your "pride and joy" and would, in effect, be your surrogate. I imagine that it would be hard to accept the idea that a ten game loss would be insignificant. It's great to be able to stand back and see things objectively, of course. Generally, I feel that SOME information is provided by every tournament or match no matter how few games are played. I agree in principle, however, that a 5 1/2 to 4 1/2 result in a ten game match would offer little insight into the current playing strengths of the players. Bob D.
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.