Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:48:49 09/01/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 01, 1999 at 14:35:37, James T. Walker wrote: >On September 01, 1999 at 07:58:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 31, 1999 at 21:57:12, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>I recently conducted a "Tournament" between Hiarcs 7.32 Fritz 5.32 & Junior 5.0. >>> With about 250 games played by each program the results left Hiarcs in first >>>place with Fritz in second and Junior in third. Then I accidently transferred >>>20 games of Blitz (5/0) of Hiarcs vs Comet B05 which Hiarcs won >>>19.5 - 0.5. The Strange thing is after adding these 20 games and recomputing >>>the ELO (Fritz GUI does this) Hiarcs fell from 1st place to 3rd place?? Does >>>this make sense? Help! >>>Jim Walker >> >> >>It probably uses the rating of the opponent since with just 3 players there is >>_no_ way to get any sort of reasonable rating anyway... It probably considered >>comet significantly weaker and had a lower rating for it. And the TPR rating >>then killed the calculations. > > >Hello Bob, >The Comet B05 had no rating going in so it is treated the same as others in the >beginning. The only difference is that it had only played 20 games. >According to the Fritz manual when I "Create" an ELO start list each player gets >the same starting ELO(e.g. 2400) which enables the calculation of a tournament >performance rating. In the next step one puts in this performance value as >starting value to create new and more exact performances. Chessbase claims the >algorithm does assume a 2400 average elo of the players in the database and says >you have to "gauge" the list to correct for this. The thing I don't understand >is if the assumed average is 2400 to begin with then why would the end result >show all 4 programs with an ELO of less than 2400? >Thanks, >Jim Walker Sounds like a bug. :) Bob
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.