Are you sure about this? Here is what I've seen on Wikipedia but I've
also seen this before from other sources:
Another departure from tradition is that ELO ratings are
calibrated by
winning percentage, not by stone handicaps. An extra handicap
stone
has much less influence on winning percentage at a low level of
play
than at a high level of play. Therefore, from the perspective of
ELO
ratings, traditional ranks are too spread out at the low level
and too
compressed at a high level. To put it another way, a 6-dan
player has
a much better chance of beating a 5-dan player than a 15-kyu
player
has of beating a 16-kyu player, so the ELO system must conclude
either
that the top players need to be further apart in rating than 100
points, or the bottom players need to be closer in rating than
100
points.
- Don
On Mon, 2006-12-25 at 20:23 +0100, Andrés Domínguez wrote:
> 2006/12/25, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > On Sun, 2006-12-24 at 13:54 -0800, David Fotland wrote:
> > > There is no fixed relationship between ELO and handicap stones. Stronger
> > > players have less variation in their play, so a handicap stone is worth
> > > more
> > > ELO points for a stronger player than a weaker player.
> >
> > What you say is consistent with what I've heard from other sources.
> >
> > My understanding is that in ELO terms the ranks are compressed at the
> > higher levels and spread out at lower levels. So there is less
> > difference between 4 dan and 5 dan than 15 kyu and 16 kyu for
> > instance.
>
> I think it's exactly the opposite. The difference between 4 dan and 5 dan is
> one stone, but more ELO than between 15 and 16k (also one stone).
>
> Andrés
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
