Re: [computer-go] Statistical Significance

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxx>]

Yes,  what I  have  seen  many times  is  that a  player  has a  great
tournament and  is afraid to play  again, knowing that  he is probably
overated.

But people  who are  rating conscious are  very often afraid  to play.
There is the constant fear that your rating might go down!

ELO  ratings   are  extremely  fine   grained.   1  rating   point  is
immeasurable  and even  100 points  isn't much.   That's why  I always
thought it would be interesting if players had 2 ratings.  One of them
would be internal to the rating organization and would be based on ELO
but  wouldn't be  the published  rating of  the player  (and  would be
basically hidden.)  The published rating would be based on the highest
ELO rating ever achieved and  organized into classes.  Sort of like in
ELO chess where 2200 or  above is considered "master."  There might be
classes defined by ELO 100 rating point differences.

The  idea would be  that you  would always  be trying  to move  into a
higher class  but would never  have to fear  dropping down to  a lower
one.  You would get to keep your achievements.  I think there are lots
of games/sports  where you  achieve rank based  on an  accumulation of
accomplishments and can't lose it  once you have achieved it.  This is
a bit more  compassionate and human.  Of course  players sometimes get
weaker but that doesn't apply so much in intellectual games as it does
in  sports where  youth is  a  much bigger  advantage.  Older  players
sometimes  get significantly  weaker over  time  but to  me the  older
players who have presumably contributed much more to the game over the
years deserve  the dignity and  status of keeping whatever  title they
have earned.

If such a  system were used in Chess, there would  probably need to be
some adjustments to the basic formula.

How is this in Go?  Can your rank go down in Go, or do you get to hold
on to ranks you have achieved?

- Don


   >Last time I checked (which is many years ago), the Danish Go Association
   >used something like the ELO system to calculate Go ratings. They had it
   >calibrated so that the numbers corresponded to kyus and dans pretty
   >directly. I think higher dan rankings were still awarded by a committee,
   >based on the calculated numbers...
   >
   >No idea how it performed over a longer time, nor indeed if they still
   >use it.
   >
   One serious disadvantage of the Elo-System is, that "before the Elo-system,
   people played chess, now the play for getting Elo points". If I ask a good
   friend of mine: "How was the last tournament, his answer is: "I gained/lost
   X Elo".
   It has become a fetish. But this is general accordance with the development
   in society. "How is your work?". "I earn XY Euro/Dollar".
   >From this perspecitive the Dan-Ranking has something oldfashioned/charming.

   Chrilly


   _______________________________________________
   computer-go mailing list
   computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/