OpenChess

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:CCRL 40/4: http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/
CCRL 40/40: http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/
IPON: http://www.inwoba.de/
SWCR: http://www.amateurschach.de/
CEGT: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/

Very good idea, putting links to all the major rating lists in one place.

And you don't relocate Houdini/Fire discussions! Even better.

notyetagm wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:CCRL 40/4: http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/
CCRL 40/40: http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/
IPON: http://www.inwoba.de/
SWCR: http://www.amateurschach.de/
CEGT: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/

Very good idea, putting links to all the major rating lists in one place.

And you don't relocate Houdini/Fire discussions! Even better.

and http://ssdf.bosjo.net/list.htm

Hi,

Also UEL: http://pagesperso-orange.fr/lefouduroi/ ... ci/uel.htm (Le Fou Numerique).

Regards,
Vlad.

Zarkon wrote:

Peter C wrote:

Chris Whittington wrote: Does anybody have a proof that rating list ELO correlates to chess playing skill?

Or that the relationship between rating list ELO and chess playing skill is in any way linear?

Why wouldn't it?

No, it's logarithmic. The strength difference between 3000 elo entity and 2900 entity is greater than the difference between 2500 entity and 2400 entity.

Peter

Are you sure? I thought a 100 Elo difference would mean that one player would score x% against the other, regardless of where it sits on the scale.

In theory, it does, in truth, it doesn't.

Peter

Peter C wrote:

Zarkon wrote:

Peter C wrote:

Chris Whittington wrote: Does anybody have a proof that rating list ELO correlates to chess playing skill?

Or that the relationship between rating list ELO and chess playing skill is in any way linear?

Why wouldn't it?

No, it's logarithmic. The strength difference between 3000 elo entity and 2900 entity is greater than the difference between 2500 entity and 2400 entity.

Peter

Are you sure? I thought a 100 Elo difference would mean that one player would score x% against the other, regardless of where it sits on the scale.

In theory, it does, in truth, it doesn't.

Peter

I've not seen anything that supports this at all. Clearly in Elo's book the statistics are laid out, and they are just as additive as are all probabilities. The definition of a 200 point gap is that the stronger player will win approximately 3 of every 4 games played. Whether the two players are 1000 and 1200, or 3000 and 3200.

If that's not the case, then the Elos are not being calculated correctly.

Rebel wrote:Let me bite: on all these rating lists the proclaimed clones (Ippo & co) are banned.

Houdini is on the IPON: http://www.inwoba.de/ rating list

Zarkon wrote:

Peter C wrote:

Chris Whittington wrote: Does anybody have a proof that rating list ELO correlates to chess playing skill?

Or that the relationship between rating list ELO and chess playing skill is in any way linear?

Why wouldn't it?

No, it's logarithmic. The strength difference between 3000 elo entity and 2900 entity is greater than the difference between 2500 entity and 2400 entity.

Peter

Are you sure? I thought a 100 Elo difference would mean that one player would score x% against the other, regardless of where it sits on the scale.

yup the elo formula its not logarithmic but linear , from wikipedia :

"Elo gives an example of calculating the rating of Lajos Portisch, a 2635-rated player, in an actual tournament of 16 players, and scored 10½ points. First the difference in rating is calculated for each other player, subtracting the other player's rating from Portisch's rating. Then the expected score against each player is determined from a table, based on this rating difference. For instance, one opponent was Vlastimil Hort, who was rated at 2600. The rating difference of 35 gave Portish an expected score of 0.55. The expected score is summed for each opponent, giving Portisch a total expected score of 9.66. Then the formula is:

new rating = old rating + K×(W-We), where K=10, W=actual score, and We=expected score.

So 2635+10×(10.5-9.66)=2643.4, Portisch's new rating "

so u can see that the elo rating difference is the key and not how much high is the elo

Jurek Chess Ranking (JCR) - 28.12.2010:
http://szachmaty.blogspot.com/search?q=saros

Hello to All,


I suggest that you stay away from both CCRL and CEGT chess engine rating lists! I clearly explained why in "CCRL Forum censored my posting on Houdini 1.5 unjustifiably!" at http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=887

I suggest three reliable, trustworthy chess engine rating lists:
1) The G/90mins Ratings (90 MINUTES TO PLAY ALL THEIR MOVES, 2 CORES, PONDER ON, TABLEBASES USED) at http://www.brinan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ ... atings.htm
2) The IPON-Rating-List (5 min/game + 3 sec/move, ponder ON) at http://www.inwoba.de/
3) The SWCR Rating (40 MOVES IN 10 MINUTES) at http://www.amateurschach.de/

Any chess engine rating list that avoids including the strongest chess engines (in particular Houdini 1.5) has basically a hidden agenda of wanting to avoid dethroning their pet chess engines (very often Rybka 4)! It is the case with the CCRL and CEGT chess engine rating lists!! In such a case, you know that these chess engine rating lists are completely unreliable and nothing less than dishonest!! Avoid them at all costs!!


Regards
MichaelIsGreat

Hello to All,


For the sake of fairness, I must add another site that is really excellent in many ways. It is not a chess engines rating list per se but it gives you a very good picture of which current chess engines are the best.
4) The TCEC (Thoresen Chess Engines Competition) web site (40 MOVES IN 100 MIN+NEXT 20 MOVES IN 50 MIN+20 MIN FOR THE REST+10 S ADDED PER MOVE AT THIS LAST TIME CONTROL; 6 CORES; TABLEBASES USED; PONDER OFF; HASH USED; ALL OPENING MOVES ARE RANDOMLY FETCHED FROM A PGN FILE WHICH CONTAINS 200.810 DIFFERENT OPENINGS AND THEY ARE ALL FIXED TO 12 MOVES / 24 PLIES) at http://www.tcec-chess.org/
This site is outstanding! It should also give you a very good idea of which chess engines are currently the best, as it does several tournaments with the best chess engines available.
Highly recommended.
In particular, check the current tournament for the Division I (that is for the best chess engines in the world) at http://www.tcec-chess.org/div_i.php Very interesting games have been played so far.


Kind Regards to All
MichaelIsGreat