Author: greg moller
Date: 12:30:02 05/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 1999 at 15:06:49, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On May 04, 1999 at 14:41:26, greg moller wrote: > >>On May 03, 1999 at 17:56:21, Will Singleton wrote: >> >>>On May 03, 1999 at 14:43:12, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>Everyone knows that computers are the best in the world at blitz already... >>> >>>Well, maybe not. :) >>> >>>Standard Blitz Bullet >>>2720 Ferret(C) 3137 Dlugy(GM) 2937 Data(C) >>>2720 OzsO(C) 3132 Ferret(C) 2930 WchessX(C) >>>2682 matemastr(C) 3101 Mofongo(C) 2914 Mofongo(C) >>>2677 RAINHA(C) 3076 FlyingPike(GM) 2912 crafty(C) >>>2676 Lynnett(C) 3058 crafty(C) 2855 Box(C) >><snip> >> >>I wouldn't trust the blitz ratings on ICC. This is a place where most players >>duck one another all the time, handpick their opponents and only play each other >>when the rating differential seems favorable. All this has a negative impact on >>the rating system's accuracy. >> >>ICC should implement a system whereby it _forces_ players to regularly play >>others in their rating bracket, possibly by generating random server pairings, >>whenever a player's open for matches, in order to keep their ratings active AND >>accurate at the same time. At the moment ratings seem dictated by players' whims >>rather than their strength. Over-inflation at the top is clearly one of the >>farcical by-products, although there may be other factors contributing to that. >> >>Also, the list shown above is subjective (as the header suggests). Ratings can >>change very fast(another fallacy) on ICC, and picking a random top-ranking list >>could just as likely show a Computer on top. >>Incidentally, to find out the 'best' blitz players list, don't use the _best_ >>command, which only gives human players (and then not all of those, either), but >>use the _rank_ <playername> command, just as Will (correctly) did. >> >>Regards, >>gm > >"best c" will include the computers. When I tried it, Ferret was above Dlugy, >due to the fluctuation you mentioned. > >Dave You are right, however the best list is still flawed in that it won't show certain human players if they have more than one handle, but their high-ranking handle is not allowed on the best list. It may not sound like a big deal, but oftentimes it IS the higher-rated, and thus more relevant, handle that gets ommitted, while the 'eligible' handle is way down on the list or not even active. This is a major problem with the best list, one that has not been addressed -- A human player is only allowed to 'register' one handle as eligible for the best list, regardless of rating or active status. Using the _rank_ command, however, shows all active handles without the misleading restriction, but you need to be aware of the fact that the same player may appear more than once. Not the perfect solution, either, but better than leaving out people altogether. regards, gm
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.