[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings
From: |
Albert Silver |
Subject: |
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Sep 2003 15:02:14 -0300 |
> > > >>Error rate (per decision) -13.86 ( -0.036%) -21.97 ( -
> 0.075%)
> > > >>Error based abs. FIBS rating 1936.0 1866.3
> > > >>Chequerplay errors rating loss 95.9 131.8
> > > >>Cube errors rating loss 18.1 51.9
> > > >
> >
> > I don't have direct experience of FIBs, but it surprises me that
with
> > a chequer error rate of about .020/move (two beers behind Joern?),
the
> > estimated ratings would be 1700 odd in the first match and 1866 in
the
> > second.
>
> That .02 is NOT a chequer error rate but an overall errror rate.
That
> fact may lessen your surprize.
Not really. The checker error rate was around 0.013 to 0.014, which in
my book is very poor and deservedly described as only Intermediate.
> > I sort of have serious doubts about the practicality of trying to
> > correlate a single short match to a rating which is supposed to be
> > accumulated over a large number of matches.
>
> Of course it's only an indicator. "If you'd play like this always
you'd
> have a rating of XYZ" is what it indicates. Yet on average (over a
large
> number) of matches I found the current FIBS estimator to be
extremely
> accurate.
This is the first big problem I'm having with this. My current average
rating according to GNU, using the new formula, is somewhere between
1850-1900. Probably closer to 1850, but this is unimportant. This is
extremely flattering, but my FIBS rating is about 150 points less. None
of this is exagerrated. It's quite possible I am incredibly unlucky
since in many, if not most, of my matches I play better than my
opponents, according to GNU, but this last item may be sour grapes so
I'll compile some results before affirming this. One thing is 100%
certain: in my last 20 matches, I have only twice had GNU give me a
rating in the 1700s, not one time below, and my rating is around 1700 at
FIBS.
> If someone gives me a large bag of .mat files I can analyse them
and
> tabulate the estimated (error based) ratings for comparison with
their
> actual ratings if known.
I'll separate all my FIBS matches, and start saving them to send to you,
plus our ratings. Just tell me what you need exactly.
> > In the meantime, I find the one word summaries more useful than the
> > estimated ratings when skipping through a long match to find my
worst
> > blunders. Awful/beginner/casual player (okay, that's two words) are
a
> > sign that I really ought to have a look at what I did wrong, the
rare
> > ET matches I can usually skip as far as learning goes.
>
> So the textual scores need to be aligned with the rating version.
I'm having some reservations on this now. I have seen a couple of huge
error rates (what I'm accustomed to thinking of as absolutely dreadful
play overall) be rightfully described as Casual Player by GNU, and still
get a very high rating. I'm not sure I want to start finding those huge
error rates be called World Class or Expert as this would be way off
IMO. Right now I'm inclined to leave the textual ratings untouched.
Don't get me wrong, I am very appreciative of your efforts, but right
now there are problems that need resolving IMHO.
Albert
>
> Kees
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, (continued)
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Joseph Heled, 2003/09/05
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Jim Segrave, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Joern Thyssen, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Jim Segrave, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Joern Thyssen, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Jim Segrave, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Christopher D. Yep, 2003/09/09
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Douglas Zare, 2003/09/09
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Christopher D. Yep, 2003/09/10
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, kvandoel, 2003/09/08
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings,
Albert Silver <=
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, kvandoel, 2003/09/08
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Albert Silver, 2003/09/08
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, kvandoel, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Joseph Heled, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Jim Segrave, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, kvandoel, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, Jim Segrave, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Strange FIBS ratings, kvandoel, 2003/09/08
Re: [Bug-gnubg] Strange FIBS ratings, Nardy Pillards, 2003/09/05