Author: Jürgen Ecker
Date: 23:53:49 01/06/06
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Eduard, well I do not think that Kurts rating list is better or worse, because of it's longer time control. It is just different. I think the quality of a rating list is shown in its systematic manner of testing and it's consistency of the data. And here is Klaus' testwork the state of the art. Moreover I think, that the timecontrol of 10m+10s is a well chosen, because it is often used in the practical play. Look at the popular chess-servers what timecontrol is used in the machinerooms. The most used timecontrol is 15 min and less per game. So I think it is a good compromise and a list with highly pratical use. And finally the differences between Kurt's rating list and Klaus' rating list are in the statistical variance, so it is just a personal preference which list you use. Jürgen Ecker Admin CSS Online >Reason: CSS tests with timecontrol "10m+10s / game" > >Kurt Utzinger tests with timecontrol "40' / moves" > >Here: > >Hiarcs 10 won one match and loses 3 matches >(against Rybka, Toga II (!), and against Fritz 9) > >31,0-19,0 (62 %) vs Shredder 9 UCI > >22,5-27,5 (45 %) vs Fritz 9 >21,0-29,0 (42 %) vs Toga II 1.1. >16,0-34,0 (32 %) vs Rybka 1.0. Beta 32-bit > >Rating list 5moves/Nunn2 40'/40: > >http://www.utzingerk.com/rating_list.htm > >That is an serious Rating-list! > >ED:
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.