Author: Alexander Kure
Date: 14:16:14 01/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2000 at 16:54:00, Peter McKenzie wrote: >>1. Shredder > >I heard this was going to be Shredder version 2 (not the version 4 that won the >1999 World Comp Champs), in which case I don't think it should be seeded #1. If >it is version 4, then I think it should be seeded #1. Actually, what i know is that it is Shredder 3 that is playing. > >>2. Ferret >>3. Nimzo >>4. Crafty >>5. Diep > >I know Diep is a strong program, but I don't understand how it is seeded in >front of LambChop. LambChop finished a point in front of Diep at the 1999 World >Computer Chess Champs and in the ICC Tournament LambChop will be on faster >hardware too. I agree with you on that, Peter > >I'm not too worried about this seeding, but would like to know the logic behind >it. > >>6. ZarkovX >>7. LambChop >>8. Insomniac >>9. Little Goliath >>10. PostModernist >>11. Amateur >>12. Hossa >>13. EXchess >>14. Grok >>15. GnuChess >>16. Bringer >>17. Galahad >>18. Tinker >>19. Averno >>20. Shrike >> >>The seedings are pretty hard to do. The pairings will be done with a >>swiss system so it is probably not deadly important to have the >>seedings 100% correct (if that is even possible to do). > >Thanks for doing a tough job. What about using the ICC ratings as a last decision if you cannot decide in seeding some programs? Greetings Alex
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.