Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:40:34 01/31/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 31, 2004 at 14:00:54, David Dahlem wrote: >On January 31, 2004 at 13:17:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 31, 2004 at 11:45:38, David Dahlem wrote: >> >>>On January 31, 2004 at 09:49:59, Thao Tak-Sen wrote: >>> >>>>On January 31, 2004 at 08:43:37, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>> >>>>>Some minutes before the opening of this year's biggest tournament I want to ask >>>>>you for your statements. If you can give your opinion about the three first >>>>>incoming programs. Just like I do it here: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>1. JUNIOR >>>>> >>>>>2. CRAFTY >>>>> >>>>>3. ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Rolf >>>> >>>>1.Hiarcs >>>>2.Rebel >>>>3.Ruffian >>>>4.Junior >>>>5.crafty >>>>6.Yace >>>>7.Quark >>>>8.Falcon >>>>9.GLC >>>>10.Pepito >>> >>>In a 9 round swiss with 54 entries, are not only the first four and last four >>>finishers determined to be accurate? Or do i stand corrected? >>> >>>Regards >>>Dave >> >>Define "accurate". you need 6 rounds for a good 1st place, 9 rounds should get >>a pretty accurate view of the first 16 places, but "accurate" is a overused word >>in a Swiss of course... > >There was a thread about this topic not too long ago. Someone posted, if my >memory is correct it was you, that after determining the number of rounds to get >a good 1st place, adding 1 additional round was needed for each additional >placement. Is this correct? > >Regards >Dave Not exactly, no. each additional round provides _more_ than one additional place of "accuracy". IE worst case should have 9 rounds giving the first 8 places to high levels of confidence..
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.