Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:01:15 03/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2004 at 12:53:55, Bouddha wrote: >On March 17, 2004 at 12:35:41, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On March 17, 2004 at 11:43:12, Anson T J wrote: >> >>>On March 17, 2004 at 10:40:30, Bigler David wrote: >>> >>>>Hi, >>>> >>>>Shredder 8 performed 82 ELO point better than Junior 8 >>>>Junior 8 performed 82 ELO point better than Shredder 7.04 >>>> >>>>So Shredder 8 performed 164 ELO better than Shredder 7.04 >>>> >>>>rgds >>> >>>I see, I thought when it was -41 / +41 that A was 41 weaker than b and b was 41 >>>stronger than a. Not that a was 82 weaker and b was 82 stronger. Perhaps you are >>>correct. thx >> >>56% is less than 50 elo difference based on fast calculation. >> >>If the result is 56-44 then I get the following difference in rating >> >>(56-44)/100*400=48 so my calculation give 48 elo. >> > > >Sorry, but I do not understand why *400 ????????? >Please explain The simple formula that I know says 100% is 400 elo difference and 50% is 0 elo difference. everything between is linear. result of 5-3 can be translated by the logic to ((5-3)/(5+3))*400=(2/8)*400=100 elo difference. result of 56-44 is translated to ((56-44)/(56+44))*400=(12/100)*400=48 elo difference result of 50-50 is translated to ((50-50)/(50+50))*400=(0/100)*400=0 elo difference. The formula is not correct because there can be difference of more than 400 elo but when the difference in elo is not very big the formula is approximately correct. 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.