Author: George Sobala
Date: 23:52:43 01/28/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 29, 2005 at 01:50:24, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > Hi George > Your test shows two (well known) things: First of all > that 10 games are much too less to conclude something > and furthermore that the influence of hardware is much > overestimated -:) Is it worth studying the games? I > hope you will continue this match up to 50 games. > Kurt [http://www.utzingerk.com] I disagree with you about the "conclude something"! e.g. http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/Service/Statistics/Sign_Test.html using n+ = 5 and n- = 0 shows that this 10 game match indicates with greater than 90% probability that Hiarcs 9.6 on an eMac G4 1.25GHz is stronger than CT2004 on a 1.6GHz Centrino at 60+30 time control. A 10 game match does not tell us by how much. I think it is worth studying the games, I enjoyed playing through them afterwards.
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.