[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: computer-go: Ratings, God and everything.
jliu <jliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
>I think the Go rating is not additive. I mean A can give B 3 stone (to
>reach 50/50 chance), B can give C 2 stone does not add-up to A can give C 5
>stone. In fact I think 2+3<5. Maybe God can only take 4 stones from 9p
>pros, but that should not be translated into God has a ranking of 13p.
Of course. The handicap-giver moves first, so an n-stone handicap is
worth n-1/2.
In your example, 1.5 + 2.5 < 4.5, which I do not doubt.
Also you assume that a difference of 1 in p ratings is worth one stone.
This is only true for amateur ratings. For p ratings, it is more like
1/3 stone.
>I think when closer to God (I mean perfect play), the non-linearity is very
>strong. Let's say people can see one-step further is 3 stones stronger,
>God's (again, I mean perfect player) ranking is 3 times number of more steps
>God can see as compared to 9p pro. A Go game has about 230 moves. So,
>God's ranking is 3 x (230-30?) = 600p.
>
>Anybody has serious objection to this (stepwise) estimate?
I think it is seriously wrong. God is around 12d, or 18p.
If he were 600p, = 206d, he would be able to give me a 205 stone
handicap. I guarantee that I could win with only 180 handicap stones,
even while drunk.
Nick
--
Nick Wedd nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx