Author: Norm Pollock
Date: 07:48:49 10/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 12, 2005 at 04:17:07, Ryan B. wrote:
>On October 12, 2005 at 03:52:51, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On October 12, 2005 at 01:27:26, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On October 12, 2005 at 01:10:39, Martin Andersen2 wrote:
>>>
>>>>From Chessbase:
>>>>
>>>>" This afternoon I have been given the latest analytical aid, Fritz 9, which, it
>>>>is claimed, is around 100 Elo points stronger than the previous version. If
>>>>true, it is a giant leap for siliconkind"
>>>>
>>>>Of course if Fritz 9 is 100 Elo points stronger than Fritz 8, it should be at
>>>>2883 (SSDF), and probably better than Fruit. But how likely is this based
>>>>on preliminary tests ?
>>
>>Fruit2.1 is at the same level of Fritz8 bilbao
>>Most customers probably do not have Fritz8 bilbao and Fruit2.1 is probably
>>slightly better than Fritz8.
>>
>>Fruit2.2 is 50-100 elo better than Fruit2.1 so it make sense to think that
>>Fruit2.2 is 100 elo better than Fritz8
>>
>>Fritz9 is near the level of Fruit2.2 based on CEGT results so I see nothing
>>wrong with the claim.
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Martin.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2676
>>>
>>>Not surprising. I guess that the Fruit advertizing budget is $0.00 and Fritz at
>>>least a few hundred thousand.
>>
>>When I told in the israeli chess forum that Fruit2.2 is 50-100 elo better than
>>Fruit2.1 then one of the response was that not a lot of people will pay 35$ for
>>the minor improvement from Fruit2.1 to Fruit2.2
>>
>>Uri
>
>
>I did not know 50-100 elo was minor.
Here is the table of rating values. Looking for closest value +/- 37.5 elo which
is equivalent to a 75 point elo improvement, we get 55%-45%. So a player with a
75 point elo advantage will score 55% against the other player.
Rating expectancies vs. differences P D P D P D
.99 677 .66 117 .33 -125
.98 589 .65 110 .32 -133
.97 538 .64 102 .31 -141
.96 501 .63 95 .30 -149
.95 470 .62 87 .29 -158
.94 444 .61 80 .28 -166
.93 422 .60 72 .27 -175
.92 401 .59 65 .26 -184
.91 383 .58 57 .25 -193
.90 366 .57 50 .24 -202
.89 351 .56 43 .23 -211
.88 335 .55 36 .22 -220
.87 322 .54 29 .21 -230
.86 309 .53 21 .20 -240
.85 296 .52 14 .19 -251
.84 284 .51 7 .18 -262
.83 273 .50 0 .17 -273
.82 262 .49 -7 .16 -284
.81 251 .48 -14 .15 -296
.80 240 .47 -21 .14 -309
.79 230 .46 -29 .13 -322
.78 220 .45 -36 .12 -335
.77 211 .44 -43 .11 -351
.76 202 .43 -50 .10 -366
.75 193 .42 -57 .09 -383
.74 184 .41 -65 .08 -401
.73 175 .40 -72 .07 -422
.72 166 .39 -80 .06 -444
.71 158 .38 -87 .05 -470
.70 149 .37 -95 .04 -501
.69 141 .36 -102 .03 -538
.68 133 .35 -110 .02 -589
.67 125 .34 -117 .01 -677
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.