Author: Daniel Karlsson
Date: 11:50:34 05/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 31, 1999 at 11:44:15, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >You may get a pretty good idea of a rating but how accurate is it? I suspect we >are dealing with a strong assumption here. Yes, I'm assuming more games against well established, weaker opponents is more accurate than few games against even opposition for rating calculation. I don't have any statistical evidence, more a gut feeling. >Also, since we know for example that Hiarcs 7 is >better than Hiarcs 6, why do they continue to test Hiarcs 6? This applies to >other outdated programs as well. I suppose because those programs on that particular hardware have well established ratings based on several hundreds of games. I don't see it as testing old version, more like using their ratings as calibration points when determining newer programs' ratings. My point is that testing against older versions on slow hardware is not useless or unfair as long as every program-hardware combo has a separate rating. Perhaps it's even necessary to avoid local rating drifts. However, I agree that matches on equal hardware would be even better.
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.