Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 04:02:39 02/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 02, 2000 at 06:27:18, Jürgen Hartmann wrote: >> >>I suspect that you are reading a lot more into this tournament than is possible. >>Junior (by the SSDF) indeed looks very strong. But this tournament was at >>fairly short time controls. Hence, the data is not at all commensurate with >>SSDF testing [Though I am not sure you implied that]. If you look at the +/- >>figures you will see that the winning margin is hardly conclusive. > >I feel pity for the poor programs winning tournaments. They always get told how >meaningless this particular event was. Poor Stefan Meyer-Kahlen who only won >three completely negligible World Championship titles is my favourite example. > >Of course Cadaqués is completely meaningless since everybody who can throw a >coin immediately sees that chess game results are completely random. > >The data is not at all commensurate with SSDF testing! Aha. So it seems quite >possible that Junior gets a bad SSDF ranking as soon as the Swedes start testing >it. However if against all strong expectations Junior (or an arbitrary other >program) gets a good SSDF result, I am sure we'll immediately discover the >methodological faults in their work which makes it meaningless and negligible. > >If I were a chess programmer, I would however prefer to win the completely >meaningless tournaments, rather than not. Hi! Very good post! Bertil
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.