Author: Amir Ban
Date: 06:30:41 10/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 28, 1999 at 09:20:17, walter irvin wrote: >On October 28, 1999 at 06:27:10, Amir Ban wrote: > >>On October 27, 1999 at 14:28:15, James B. Shearer wrote: >> >>>On October 27, 1999 at 11:13:57, Amir Ban wrote: >>> >>>>On October 27, 1999 at 00:30:45, James B. Shearer wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 26, 1999 at 12:54:02, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I got noplayed by crafty last week. I think it was playing more than 4 games in >>>>>>a row rather than disconnecting. At the time crafty's rating was 3146, so it >>>>>>seems it's rating jump is a result of noplaying ban. Crafty & clones typically >>>>>>gain around 200-300 points when they don't play other computers. I didn't >>>>>>realize crafty's noplay list is so long, but looking at it it effectively >>>>>>doesn't play top computers any more (ferret is hardly around these days). >>>>> >>>>> The bit about 200-300 points is hard to believe. In fact I don't >>>>>believe it. If this were true the crafty clones would be continuously pumping >>>>>rating points from the human pool to the computer pool. To maintain balance >>>>>some computers in the computer pool would have to be pumping just as many points >>>>>back into the human pool. Which computers do you think are doing this? I've >>>>>been playing crafty clones to inflate my rating but apparently this is all wrong >>>>>and I should be playing some other computers. Which are they? >>>>> James B. Shearer >>>> >>>>Mofongo, eggsalad, counterplay, wyrm and others. Some of them don't exclude >>>>computers in their formula, but they noplay me, and have always done so. I don't >>>>know who else they're noplaying. >>>> >>>>To find them, simply look at the top of the blitz list for crafty clones. To >>>>find those that play with everyone, look much lower in the list. >>> >>> This is not responsive to the point I was making. Suppose crafty >>>clones A, B and C play with everyone and have rating 2700. According to you >>>they would have rating 2900-3000 if they just played humans. This means that >>>when A, B and C do play humans they will be picking up lots of rating points (as >>>their rating tries to move from 2700 to 2900-3000). For their rating to stay at >>>2700 they must be losing the rating points they are picking up from humans to >>>some of the computers they are also playing. Suppose they are losing points to >>>computers X, Y and Z. Then X, Y and Z must also be losing the rating points >>>they are winning from A, B and C back to the human pool (else the rating of X, Y >>>and Z would rise to the point that X, Y and Z stopped winning rating points from >>>A, B and C). >>> So the question I am asking is what are names of programs X, Y and Z >>>whose ratings would shoot up if they noplayed humans? If A, B and C actually >>>exist then conservation of rating points means X, Y and Z must exist also. As a >>>human I want to play X,Y and Z and grab some of those rating points. >>> >> >>Your argument is too complicated for me to follow. It sounds like you are >>assuming that ICC ratings are in some sort of equilibrium and drawing >>conclusions based on that. >> >>I don't think theres any sort of equilibrium there. For one thing, it's not >>closed, and players are always entering and exiting the system. Besides, rating >>averages show huge drifts over time. I think blitz ratings are drifting >>perpetually higher, and in three years we will see above 4000. Another thing >>wrong with your argument is that the lower rated crafties will not be popular >>with humans since they have alternatives with same version & CPU but much higher >>rating. >> >>Your conclusion, that there are no free rides at ICC, is certainly false. Anyone >>who's interested enough can boost his rating several hundred points by careful >>opponent selection. There's one or two crafties that have done exactly that. >> >> >>>>Last year there were several top computers playing regularly on ICC, and the >>>>standard 'high' rating was in the 2900's. Now serious comp-comp competition is >>>>almost disappeared from ICC and crafty, the only one still around, has gone up >>>>around 200-300 points. >>> >>> Maybe crafty got a lot better and has driven the competition from the >>>field of battle. >>> James B. Shearer >> >>Maybe, but I can also get a much higher rating than I could hope for last year, >>so maybe not. >> >>Amir > >Amir i dont see why you are getting so excited about crafty's rating . junior >has nothing to prove .junior proves every year at the world championships that >it is a top notch program . now with deep junior multi processor it has to be >one of the most sought after programs .i would not worry if i were you . Thanks. The argument here is not crafty's rating but by how much crafties gain by playing against humans only. Amir
This page took 0.01 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.