Hideki Kato wrote:
In Nihon Kiin's ELO system(1), 1000 ELO is 1 rank,
The Elo rating is based on two assumptions:
a. The performance of each player in each game is a
normally distributed random variable.
b. All players performance have the same standard
deviation. (This is controversial
On 12/25/06, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hideki Kato wrote:
Nevertheless, I have certain experience (not with
MC) of computer go with handicap and I can tell:
Waiting for the opponent to blunder is only a good
strategy if the handicap is lower than it should.
E.g. 7 kyu difference
Hi Hideki,
I think what I will do is use ELO and a simple formula for
determining handicap. The formula will impose a slight
curve on the value of a handicap stone, it will slightly
increase with each ELO point. In other words a stronger
player will benefit more from having an extra stone and
I was always taught in Chess to play the board, not the player.
But in principle this is wrong if your goal is to increase your
chances of winning the game.
The problem with playing your opponent is that if you don't know
the proper technique for doing this, it will distract you from
the real
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
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 mu
