Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 23:40:44 08/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 13, 1999 at 23:40:04, Ian Osgood wrote: >On August 13, 1999 at 22:40:18, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On August 13, 1999 at 22:21:38, James T. Walker wrote: >>[snip] >>>Of course most of the Cheating is random or they would be caught easily. Don't >>>look for reasons behind the cheating. There are none that make any sense. >>If the cheating is random, either: >>0. It will be rare enough to not affect their ELO much, in which case the >>probablility of you facing such a cheater will not affect your ELO much. >>1. It will be often enough to raise their ELO in a factor equivalent to the >>probability of their cheating against you. >> >>The ELO system is self-healing, even against cheaters. > >I am IanO, maintainer of SapphireII. > >I haven't seen many likely instances of computer cheating against SapphireII. >What I *do* see are people who find a loophole in Sapphire's opening book, and >then repeat games against it using that same opening. People also have matched >SapphireII with a zero inc time control, then played a stonewall-type opening, >locking up the position and repeating moves behind their wall until SapphireII >runs out of time (it takes a minimum of one second to respond). SapphireII has >ditched a hundred points at a time through such tactics (until I get the abuser >on my noplay list). I fight back with restrictive formulas. > >Ian That can be enough of a reason for the low rating that SapphireII maintains! I figured that chess players would target one of the lower rated beasts to do tactics like this to inflate their own rating and by the same token, decrease -Sapphire's rating through these tactics! Terry
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.