Re: computer-go: relative strengths chess vs go

[Andre Engels <engels@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Barry Phease wrote:

> >In a post on the rating list one says 100 rating points are worth
> >a stone.
> 
> This is a very rough approximation and certainly doesn't apply among 
> professionals.  It might be true that 100 rating points correspond to one 
> rank difference, but about 3-4 rank differences make up one stone among 
> professionals.

What makes you think that 100 rating points is similar to one rank rather
than one stone for professionals? The EGF rating regards one amateur rank
as 100 points, but one professional rank as only 30 points of rating.
I do not know whether their system is actually close enough to ELO to
use it as comparison, though (the algorithm will be similar, but the 
numbers may have been plugged in differently).

-- 
Andre Engels, engels@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise,
we don't believe in it at all			-- Noam Chomsky