Author: KarinsDad
Date: 07:44:46 03/18/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 18, 1999 at 10:07:01, Charles Unruh wrote: >I have played 155 tournament games in my career and i have never lost or drawn a >single game against any person that was 150 rating points below me. Charles, Your playing history is an anomally. I have played players 400 points below me and lost and I have played players 400 points above me and won. There are some players who play "similar" to computers in that for their level of ability, they make very few tactical mistakes. You may be one of those types of players. I am not one of those types of players. I can make a valid sac of a knight against a player 600 points higher than me and worry the heck out of him and 5 moves later, I can make a putzer move that 3 moves earlier, I mentally said to myself could not be made in the game. My current rating is almost 400 points lower than yours and I would make a wager that in a 10 game match of 40/2 G/60, I would take 1 to 2 points from you. Why? Because I sometimes play at expert level and sometimes play at D level. It just depends on how well I am concentrating at the time. > In a mere 6 >game match yermo could be expected to take H7 out 6 0. Yermo will almost definitely not win 6-0. The reason is that if he is leading the match (say 2-0), he will take a draw in a basically drawn position and not push for a win that may not be there. This happens a lot at the GM level and I cannot imagine that it will not happen in this match. > My rating is currently >in the 1900s. I'm sure there are many players with similar records. I have drawn or beaten at G30 or slower times every 1900-1999 player in the 2 main clubs I have played in within the last 3 years at one time or another and my rating is currently in the high 1500s. I would predict that there are very few players with your type of record. > This leads >me to believe that there is some error when one predicts that in a 6 game match >that a 2500 player should score 2/6 against a 2630 player. I certainly hope H7 >is much stronger than 2500, otherwise this will just increase speculation about >the progs strength. Your assumption here is based on your previous assumption as to other players having similar narrow banded win/draw/lose ratios like yourself. This is rarely the case, so the second assumption here is probably also based on a false premise. To illustrate my point, go to ANY state chess web page and look at the results of recent tournaments. You will find many examples of players 150+ apart where the lower rated player wins or draws against the higer rated player. For example, just last year, a D rated player drew a master in our state. He even had a won game, but he didn't see it over the board (he did see it on his own after the game). This particular D rated player also played me during that tournament. He had never beaten me in many G30 or slower games, but he beat me that tournament. He was like a house on fire. It happens. Well, I'm late. Gotta go. I'll add more later. KarinsDad :) > This because if it loses all of the games we can only judge >it's strength by the quality of play not by how many games it lost. A 2500 >player would be a much better purely investigative experiment. Alas we must >take what we can get. This match should be more fun from a spectators point of >view, but from an investigative point of view, there may not be much knowledge >gleaned, unles H7 is considerably stronger than 2500. Everyone primarily has >been wanting to demonstrate that comps are at least 2500 first.
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.