Author: James T. Walker
Date: 16:55:00 03/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2004 at 14:28:01, Bryan Hofmann wrote: >On March 30, 2004 at 13:28:36, Pierre Chevalier wrote: > >>An important subject on this site has been the number of games necessary >>for a result to be statistically meaningful. My question is whether >>Kasparov and Karpov have played enough games against one another or if >>Kasparov's margin of victory has been large enough to be statistically >>meaningful? Most chessplayers only play one another maybe ten times >>but K and K played each other in 144 championship level games. Anyone >>can answer but Theron and Utzinger I know have expertise on this matter. > >Since I do not know the wins/loss numbers of these games I have to work with >percentages. If Kasparov won 60% of the 144 games then yes at a significance of >99% you can say Kasparov is better. If the head to head games were all that they ever played then who is best may be uncertain but since we have many more games/opponents and the Elo rating system I'm sure Kasparov was/is/always will be the best.
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.