Thank you Don, Don Dailey: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >I don't have any reason to believe there is a problem. The rating >system is not based on how well you do against the anchor player, it's >just a device to prevent long-term rating drift. If the pool of >players were to inflate or deflate for any reason, the Anchor will not >drift with them and so WHOEVER plays the anchor will get corrections >which will propagate to all the players.
Conceptually, I agree. But apparently the ELO values of highly rated and longly playing programs such as MonteGNU are less these days than previous. Do you have day-by-day rating of a program? It may support my observation. Of course, as this onfusion is temporal and will converge in a few weeks I guess, it may not be a big problem. It, however, would be better to not throw so many new programs into cgos in the same time for everyone anyway. >I have long considered setting up a lower-end anchor. To do this, I >would let some fixed weaker player play for several weeks and then >average his rating over time to arrive at a good guess. It should be a >substantial number of games to be accurate. I think it takes about >50000 or more games to get within a couple of ELO points if we were >doing straight performance ratings, but I would setting for less - it >wouldn't be that critical for a low level player (and we could even >adjust it later based on more games.) Don't you try the same for high-end anchor using released version of MoGo? -gg >- - Don > > >Hideki Kato wrote: >> Hi Don and all, >> >> There are many variants of MoGo run on CGOS 9x9 >> now # http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/standings.html >> >> I guess they force confuse the rating system because MoGo is the >> strongest, programs have a match more frequently against MoGo than >> anchors and get rating decrease in average. If we had many anchors >> running this would not happen. Someday, in theory, it will converge a >> balancing point but it may take so long time. >> >> As I'm not familiar with the match-making and rating system of cgos, I >> may be wrong. >> >> gg (Hideki) >> -- >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) >> _______________________________________________ >> computer-go mailing list >> computer-go@computer-go.org >> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ >> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) >Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > >iD8DBQFHCBI1DsOllbwnSikRAgP6AJ0TCdF1/bWVTUT6lUhzpamRwvsc3wCfSZuc >iD0x/AU9o8Zu+i1kiOYA8XY= >=NWUA >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >_______________________________________________ >computer-go mailing list >computer-go@computer-go.org >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
