Home > Archive > Chess politics > April 2005 > Re: Ratings experts: Please explain





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: Ratings experts: Please explain
Angelo De Pa1ma

2005-04-11, 5:59 pm


Mike,

You have still not explained the results I outlined originally, or the
little experiment I performed with the rating calculator.

Why is going 50% against five players rated 2000 a better result than going
50% against an 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, and 2200. That's what I demonstrated.
Why is it?


"Mike Nolan" <nolan@gw.tssi.com> wrote in message
news:d2rqdi$ac$1@gw.tssi.com...
quote:

> "Angelo De Pa1ma" <adpspammersgotohell@tellurian.net> writes:
>
>
> I had 2 years of college math beyond calculus, but I don't feel qualified
> to say whether it is fair or not, if you think that is a problem I would
> suggest you take it up with the Ratings Committee, chaired by Dr. Mark
> Glickman and with members Dr. Tom Doan and Dr. Ken Sloan, all PhDs.
>
> In the example I posted earlier, a 2200 performance rating for two 1800
> players resulted in a much larger ratings gain for the one who played
> more games, which seems reasonable to me.
> --
> Mike Nolan



Copyright 2003 - 2009 gamesreviews.net Software forum  PC Hardware reviews