question to Prof Hyatt regarding milov vs rybka

[duncan]

regarding the latest milov rybka 3 match Mr kaufman estimated it played at 3050 level. I would like to know your opinion on this.

also could you comment on this post by uri

thank you

http://64.68.157.89/forum/viewtopic.php ... t&start=20



All the evidence of the results suggest that computer programs are significantly stronger than humans and even programs that are significantly weaker than rybka on slower hardware could get draws with kramnik and kasparov but for some reason some people insist that human are still equal or better.

I do not understand why they do it.

[bob]

regarding the latest milov rybka 3 match Mr kaufman estimated it played at 3050 level. I would like to know your opinion on this.

also could you comment on this post by uri

thank you

http://64.68.157.89/forum/viewtopic.php ... t&start=20



All the evidence of the results suggest that computer programs are significantly stronger than humans and even programs that are significantly weaker than rybka on slower hardware could get draws with kramnik and kasparov but for some reason some people insist that human are still equal or better.

I do not understand why they do it.

I think the very concept of "played at a 3050 level" is ridiculous. First, who can say what that level looks like? second, can an IM recognize play at a level that is 600 points above his own level?

I don't have any opinion about the game or the level of play, Larry would look much wiser if he kept away from the hyperbole himself...

[duncan]

if you know some ones elo score you can predict percentage score against different opponents.

based on tests he did with rybka he found the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points. milov elo is about 3700, so if the match would have been a 4 4 tie then its elo level would have been 3100 as it was 4.5 3.5 then he estimated 3050.

so let's say that 3050 elo means you can score 85% against kramink/anand then assuming this match is a representative sample of rybks's playing strength, and assuming the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points (at the 2700 level [as he said it is worth more the higher the elo]) he would expect rybka to score 85% against kramink/anand .


that is what he seemed to be saying rather than he was in a position to judge chess skill.

I would like to hear your comment on this and what uri said.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

regarding the latest milov rybka 3 match Mr kaufman estimated it played at 3050 level. I would like to know your opinion on this.

also could you comment on this post by uri

thank you

http://64.68.157.89/forum/viewtopic.php ... t&start=20



All the evidence of the results suggest that computer programs are significantly stronger than humans and even programs that are significantly weaker than rybka on slower hardware could get draws with kramnik and kasparov but for some reason some people insist that human are still equal or better.

I do not understand why they do it.

I think the very concept of "played at a 3050 level" is ridiculous. First, who can say what that level looks like? second, can an IM recognize play at a level that is 600 points above his own level?

I don't have any opinion about the game or the level of play, Larry would look much wiser if he kept away from the hyperbole himself...

Agreed,even worse....these stupid odd methods make it much harder to measure whatever Elo difference you want to estimate.....

[bob]

if you know some ones elo score you can predict percentage score against different opponents.

based on tests he did with rybka he found the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points. milov elo is about 3700, so if the match would have been a 4 4 tie then its elo level would have been 3100 as it was 4.5 3.5 then he estimated 3050.

so let's say that 3050 elo means you can score 85% against kramink/anand then assuming this match is a representative sample of rybks's playing strength, and assuming the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points (at the 2700 level [as he said it is worth more the higher the elo]) he would expect rybka to score 85% against kramink/anand .


that is what he seemed to be saying rather than he was in a position to judge chess skill.

I would like to hear your comment on this and what uri said.

My comment is this: what says that the Elo scale is linear at the upper or lower fringes of the range? What says that a pawn is worth 400? This is a _lot_ of speculation. I'd bet that between 1000-level players, a pawn means very little, while at the super-GM level, it is almost winning.

I'm not into this speculation stuff, and I don't consider it particularly interesting to play these handicapped matches. If people want to play 'em, and watch 'em, more power to 'em. I'm not among 'em however.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

if you know some ones elo score you can predict percentage score against different opponents.

based on tests he did with rybka he found the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points. milov elo is about 3700, so if the match would have been a 4 4 tie then its elo level would have been 3100 as it was 4.5 3.5 then he estimated 3050.

so let's say that 3050 elo means you can score 85% against kramink/anand then assuming this match is a representative sample of rybks's playing strength, and assuming the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points (at the 2700 level [as he said it is worth more the higher the elo]) he would expect rybka to score 85% against kramink/anand .


that is what he seemed to be saying rather than he was in a position to judge chess skill.

I would like to hear your comment on this and what uri said.

My comment is this: what says that the Elo scale is linear at the upper or lower fringes of the range? What says that a pawn is worth 400? This is a _lot_ of speculation. I'd bet that between 1000-level players, a pawn means very little, while at the super-GM level, it is almost winning.

I'm not into this speculation stuff, and I don't consider it particularly interesting to play these handicapped matches. If people want to play 'em, and watch 'em, more power to 'em. I'm not among 'em however.

My deep respect for a words of wisdom....
Odd matches are monkey circus regards,
Dr.D

[duncan]

regarding regular computer-human games, he said Hydra, earned a 3000 rating against humans in fourteen games.

is that correct ?

[Rolf]

if you know some ones elo score you can predict percentage score against different opponents.

based on tests he did with rybka he found the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points. milov elo is about 3700, so if the match would have been a 4 4 tie then its elo level would have been 3100 as it was 4.5 3.5 then he estimated 3050.

so let's say that 3050 elo means you can score 85% against kramink/anand then assuming this match is a representative sample of rybks's playing strength, and assuming the exchange handicap worth about 400 elo points (at the 2700 level [as he said it is worth more the higher the elo]) he would expect rybka to score 85% against kramink/anand .


that is what he seemed to be saying rather than he was in a position to judge chess skill.

I would like to hear your comment on this and what uri said.

My comment is this: what says that the Elo scale is linear at the upper or lower fringes of the range? What says that a pawn is worth 400? This is a _lot_ of speculation. I'd bet that between 1000-level players, a pawn means very little, while at the super-GM level, it is almost winning.

I'm not into this speculation stuff, and I don't consider it particularly interesting to play these handicapped matches. If people want to play 'em, and watch 'em, more power to 'em. I'm not among 'em however.

What a crap!

In Golf or Go handicaps are part of the game and in chess it's a known tradition. Already Morphy played it and sometimes he then lost such a game.

[dj]

Rolf wrote:

In Golf or Go handicaps are part of the game...

Both are very different to chess, and the handicaps apply to amateurs and not to professional golfers or Dan go players. Indeed in go the opposite to giving handicaps has occurred in serious go with adjustments to komi being made to attempt to negate the advantage of the first move in all master games, whether the players are 1 Dan or 9 Dan.

Rolf wrote:

...and in chess it's a known tradition. Already Morphy played it and sometimes he then lost such a game.

"Already"? Morphy was near the end of the period of odds games and not the beginning. Its heyday was in the 18th century in games played for money. Almost all Philidor's games were at odds but only 15% of Morphy's, and nowadays it is time handicaps that have replaced material handicaps. By the first half of the twentieth century the very occasional odds games by GMs were exhibition games. The Kasparov-Chapman match (for money) in 2001 was a very rare example of a modern GM playing an odds game.

Rolf wrote:

What a crap!

Isn't there a saying about a fox smells its own hole? Dr Hyatt made just two points - both eminently sensible:
1. It is absurd to quantify a pawn as being worth 400 elo points.
2. Dr Hyatt himself does not find handicap games interesting but accepts that others may do.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Rolf wrote:

In Golf or Go handicaps are part of the game...

Both are very different to chess, and the handicaps apply to amateurs and not to professional golfers or Dan go players. Indeed in go the opposite to giving handicaps has occurred in serious go with adjustments to komi being made to attempt to negate the advantage of the first move in all master games, whether the players are 1 Dan or 9 Dan.

Rolf wrote:

...and in chess it's a known tradition. Already Morphy played it and sometimes he then lost such a game.

"Already"? Morphy was near the end of the period of odds games and not the beginning. Its heyday was in the 18th century in games played for money. Almost all Philidor's games were at odds but only 15% of Morphy's, and nowadays it is time handicaps that have replaced material handicaps. By the first half of the twentieth century the very occasional odds games by GMs were exhibition games. The Kasparov-Chapman match (for money) in 2001 was a very rare example of a modern GM playing an odds game.

Rolf wrote:

What a crap!

Isn't there a saying about a fox smells its own hole? Dr Hyatt made just two points - both eminently sensible:
1. It is absurd to quantify a pawn as being worth 400 elo points.
2. Dr Hyatt himself does not find handicap games interesting but accepts that others may do.

Thanks Derek,we needed a fresh meat in the depate as Rolf's one stinks from miles away already