Author: Anson T J
Date: 10:56:57 03/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2004 at 13:28:33, Bouddha wrote: >On March 17, 2004 at 13:01:15, Uri Blass wrote: > >>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 > > >Sorry but as far as I know, 100% is not 400 ELO and ELO vs % is not LINEAR ! > >rgds You aren't saying anything Uri hasn't said already. Uri said its _approximately_ correct when the the difference in percentage is small. The Junior interface calculated 56% as +41 elo. Uri's formula gave +48 elo which I think is approximately correct. Surely closer than the 82 elo someone above mentioned.
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.