Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 07:19:25 12/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 1999 at 06:56:23, Graham Laight wrote: >Hi Bertil! > >Speaking as someone with insider knowledge of the SSDF ratings, do you think >that, at the top end, the ratings might have become too high? > >In the past, did you used find that, once the SSDF list had been calibrated >correctly, the ratings tended to stay at about the correct level by themselves, >or, when you tested against human players, did you then have to make significant >corrections to the scale? > >At the moment, there seem to be quite a few people about who strongly feel that >the top end of the SSDF list has gone too high (in relation to the FIDE Elo >rating list) - and that maybe the top computer programs should be rated more in >the region of 2450 than 2696. > >What are your feelings on the subject? > >Thanks for your time and thoughts on this. > >-g Hi! Yes I think the list is inflated but only 20-30 elo. Enrique checked some programs from the past vs today and the average decrease in elo was 18 points. I have did the same and found something between 20-30 points. However we have in this forum a couple of high-reputated (not without reasons in other cases) persons that over and over tries to compare the programs performance in single-game matches with increment time controls and sometime double increment time controls. I guess that humans can perform 50-100 elo better than under normal tournament conditions. As I sometimes play in tournaments I know the performance in round 9 is much worse than in round 1. You are tired, maybe you have dined and wined a little bit to much the day before and so on. I only know off one comp-human tournament this year in south-america where Rebel10, CM6000 and Hiarcs6 performed 2603 on P2-400 (average), someone say less motivated players but you can´t be fully motivated in 10-11 rounds. Yes the players rating was only 2080-2450 or so but the computers didn´t loss a single game. If you play in a tournament against 3-4 comps and 7-8 humans it´s impossible to prepare as you can do against a computer in this case Rebel that is a static program and always play the same moves in contrast to Nimzo or Comet that never play the same game twice. Conclusion: The list could be slightly inflated. It´s based on TOURNAMENT games, not single-game matches with Internet delays. If players practise a lot against computers and especially against a single program (s)he can learn the style and perform better, and that´s the main reason for the differnt results. IMO Regards Bertil SSDF
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.