Author: Luis E. Alvarado
Date: 17:23:27 01/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 13, 2000 at 04:30:50, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 13, 2000 at 02:37:53, Bert Seifriz wrote: >>On January 13, 2000 at 01:29:56, Jouni Uski wrote: >> >>>As You see from Enriques tournament Fritz is superior to Rebel - so >>>Anand is simply correct. >>> >>>Jouni >> >>20 games have no statistical relevance, even if you do not believe it. > >A better statement would be "very little statistical significance." But you are >correct in your basic assertion. Imagine the following experiment: > >"Which is stronger, heads or tails?" >We flip a coin. The side that comes up most is stronger. Go ahead and try it >-- everybody. Quite surprisingly, most people will *not* get 10/10, even though >they really are almost exactly even. >Here is my sequence: >T - T - H - H - T - H - H - H - H - T - H - H - T - H - T - T - H - H - T - T >9 tails and 11 heads (I used one of those fancy new quarters with a Georgia >peach.) Seems like heads is a little stronger. How about some other results? >I will not be at all surprised if someone gets 15 of one kind. Yet we know they >are about even. > >It is *exactly* the same with chess programs that are about even. Like, for >instance, Fritz and Rebel. > >Not an opinion. Math, baby. Pure math. Now, one may be stronger than the >other. But to prove conclusively would take a staggering number of trials. You have a point but, that is why we are forze to rely in the SSDF ratings. If FRITZ is rated Higher than Rebel, Then it is stronger.
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.