View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:25 am



Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Scalp! 
Author Message
Rook

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:45 pm
Posts: 101
Location: Fresno, California
Rating: 1967
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: Scalp!
Look back again.. I said, "If you like you can pretend I said 2000-2200". Of course it doesn't really matter to me. The man played like a first category player. Again.. If you want to get another assessment, by all means get more games on here I will be happy to up the assessment. The problem is you are disagreeing with my opinion on the matter.:-) Mostly because you would rather him have played like a master so you can say you beat a master rather than admit he played like a first cat/expert. Because that would make you look worse if you beat someone approximately 2000? Not really sure why it matters. But ok.. Again.. Pretend I said 2000-2200 then you can pretend you beat a 2100. <Shrug> Fact remains he played below his class, you played above your class. What more do you want?

_________________
Proud supporter of Igor Smirnov's Remote Chess Academy. If you are interested in a good training program, here is the link:
http://chess-teacher.com/affiliates/idevaffiliate.php?id=1517_2_3_1


Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:56 am
Profile YIM WWW
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: Scalp!
I don't know how many time I have to tell you that I known he played below his class and that I don't take credit for playing a fantastic game.

All I said was that your rating scale of 1900-2100 was ridiculous, and your reasons for choosing it, arbitrary. Then you say "oh then pretend I said something else". That's not how discussions work. I said, if you gave a higher spectrum I would agree with you. So then you raise spectrum, but in the process imply that I'm defensive and egotistical for trying to discuss this idea, just because it conflicts with your opinions.

You're confusing the games that I played with him, with the actual discussion about ratings. Even if he played like a total patzer, that doesn't change the fact that his rating is 195ECF and so he must have played pretty well up until that point to get that rating. But you insist on making this about my ego because that means you have something to attack, since your actual ideas are total rubbish.

Judging from how you talk to people (here and in another thread) I doubt there is anything more to be gained from this, so I'm out.


Wed Nov 13, 2013 4:20 pm
Profile
Rook

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:45 pm
Posts: 101
Location: Fresno, California
Rating: 1967
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: Scalp!
Well I am sorry you took it that way. Was not intended. Sometimes it's difficult for me to express to some people online. You are in the 1 in 10 people who fall into this category it seems. I think it's more possibly you're taking my style of typing as an attack rather then just an attempt to give information. And I am not confusing anything. Just somewhere the communication barrier is up and I am not totally positive how to eliminate it nor why it is up in the first place. My assumption about you taking offense stands because you are the one getting mad at me for my opinion on the matter. I also further assume that some of "MY" information is not passing your logic circuits because of this barrier.

The rating problem is actually quite obvious, but I can see you don't have the patience to find out why I see it in that way. And I am sorry for that. I understand your view and take it as a valid opinion, but I just don't see why I should be forced to agree with you in order for us to speak on a civil level. I am not saying you're wrong, just that I have a difference stand on the assessment. It's a part of why theory in general exists in any form. Two sides have a difference of opinion and both are most likely very valid. I rather enjoy communication and difference of opinion. I would hope that you decide that it is beneficial to discuss further at another time or another topic.

Let me know what you think I am always open for discussion. Again sorry for annoying you.

_________________
Proud supporter of Igor Smirnov's Remote Chess Academy. If you are interested in a good training program, here is the link:
http://chess-teacher.com/affiliates/idevaffiliate.php?id=1517_2_3_1


Wed Nov 13, 2013 6:18 pm
Profile YIM WWW
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: Scalp!
JumpNMustang wrote:
My assumption about you taking offense stands because you are the one getting mad at me for my opinion on the matter.

...

The rating problem is actually quite obvious, but I can see you don't have the patience to find out why I see it in that way.


Obvious troll is obvious.


Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:54 am
Profile
Pawn

Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:46 am
Posts: 12
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: Scalp!
hey, btw, i like that music provided by your soundcould page. i'd rate it with 5 stars, but don't hang me as i can't say what that is in ELO.... and cheers for the games!


Thu Nov 14, 2013 12:09 pm
Profile
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: Scalp!
starrin_ra wrote:
hey, btw, i like that music provided by your soundcould page. i'd rate it with 5 stars, but don't hang me as i can't say what that is in ELO.... and cheers for the games!


haha, very dry :D Thanks a lot, glad you like it :)


Thu Nov 14, 2013 12:16 pm
Profile
King

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:22 am
Posts: 329
Location: United Stated
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: Scalp!
I will fix everything using math here

since you are saying that he is between 1900-2000, let's take the lower end, which is 1900

They played 2 games, so n=2.

Since probability of winning is on average .5, p=.5

Standard Deviation would be .5*.5*1900= 475.

Since we played 2 games, we divide 475 by sqrt(2), giving about 336.

Flint claims that his elo is about 2200. So let's calculate the chance of a 1900 playing style being 2200. We do normalcdf(2200,10^99,1900,336), giving: .186, or 18.6% chance being a 2200.

If the number we took initially was 2000, then the Standard Deviation would be 500, normalcdf(2200,10^99,2000,500/(sqrt(2)))=.286, or 28.6% chance being a >2200.

The conclusion is: If the player Flint was playing against was playing like a 1900-2000 player, there is a 18.6%-28.6% chance that the player's rating is >2200.

18.6-28.6% chance is not bad for probability, it is quite likely that the player Flint was playing against is 2200. The 2200 could be having a bad day, think about it, when you play on the internet, don't you also sometimes go up and down 100 rating a day?

In case you wanted to know the probability of Flint's opponent being >2100 (If we use 1900 approx.) = .276, if we use 2000 approx, then the probability is .389.

So please, stop arguing and I have all the statistics here. If you need to understand the process, feel free to go and take a college Statistics Course.

_________________
i will beat you... if you don't beat me.


Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:13 pm
Profile
King

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:22 am
Posts: 329
Location: United Stated
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: Scalp!
I forgot to mention: In the math I did in the above post, I assumed linear function of the elo rating system/amount of players in respect to the rating. Since the actual function looks like a inverse logistic function, the further we go to the right, the more approximately linear it would be (Which is why I assumed linear in the calculations). In reality, the percentages would be slightly higher if you take account of the slight curve there is.

If you are confused about what I did in the above post/this post, please do not frustrate, this is quite advanced stuff (I am taking AP courses at school, which is why I can do those :) , I did normalcdf using a calculator though, otherwise I would already be working for a big company now :D ).

Regarding the elo system, it accounts for games that are OTB. That means a player's actions may give his/her opponent hints about his/her thinking. When I play OTB, I often look at my opponent as he/she makes his/her moves. I follow his/her eyes on the board and try to make up what he/she is thinking. i also pay attention to my opponents' small actions. I would try to read his/her mind to see if he/she feels happy or not happy about the position, and whether he/she is comfortable or not. This is why I can play at a much higher level in real life than on computers.

If what I just said in the above paragraph is the case, it could be that Flint's opponent was paying less attention to Flint since it is just a normal, play for fun game. It is very possible that one's thinking would be slowed down and become more relaxed since this game isn't super-duper serious. Meanwhile Flint could be playing his guts out trying to win since he probably respects the other player, closing the gap between the two players by a magnitude.

_________________
i will beat you... if you don't beat me.


Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:31 pm
Profile
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: Scalp!
thechesser wrote:
If what I just said in the above paragraph is the case, it could be that Flint's opponent was paying less attention to Flint since it is just a normal, play for fun game. It is very possible that one's thinking would be slowed down and become more relaxed since this game isn't super-duper serious. Meanwhile Flint could be playing his guts out trying to win since he probably respects the other player, closing the gap between the two players by a magnitude.


I'm almost certain that this is exactly what happened :) He didn't seem distracted or like he wasn't paying attention, but he also probably didn't place as much value on the game as I did.


Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:00 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF