[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs
From: |
kvandoel |
Subject: |
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs |
Date: |
Sat, 13 Sep 2003 01:55:43 +0200 (CEST) |
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 10:14:47, Albert Silver wrote:
>Thanks for the results. I'd like to reiterate my suggestion of testing
>the METs specifically at the scores where they differ the most. Zare
>pointed out that the Woolsey table at 4-away 3-away looked completely
>wrong compared to the Snowie table for example. Many othger scores may
>be quite correct so testing all the scores may dilute the differences
>one would feel. How about trying a series of match games where the score
>is specifically 4-away 3-away and see how big a difference it makes?
A series of 1882 4-away 3-away 0-ply matches, snowie.xml versus
woolsey.xml, yielded a rating difference of 2 +- 0 rating points (0
meaning <.5), analysed from point of view of snowie.xml.
Kees
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs, Ian Shaw, 2003/09/09
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs,
kvandoel <=
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs, kvandoel, 2003/09/13
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs, kvandoel, 2003/09/13
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs, Ian Shaw, 2003/09/12
Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: The importance of METs, Robert-Jan Veldhuizen, 2003/09/12