[Computer-go] Series Champion of the KGS bot tournaments
michaelwilliams75 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 29 20:21:13 PDT 2010
You could enter all the results into Bayeselo and use the relative
elos to define the final ranking.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Jason House
<jason.james.house at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that it seems complicated. What's wrong with a flat number of points for each place in a tournament? Variation in points due to time limits, and board sizes is very subjective.
> Having too few rounds increases the variability of results, so I could see reducing the spread of points between places, but total points awarded shouldn't change. That's tough to get correct and maybe it's better not to adjust for that?
> The number of *strong* players in a tournament can drastically effect the final results. This is probably the only factor to use to increase the total points awarded.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 29, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Nick Wedd <nick at maproom.co.uk> wrote:
>> In June, Hideki Kato wrote
>>> Hello Nick,
>>> What do you think about the idea to establish the series (anual)
>>> champion of the KGS bot tournaments, by assigning some points
>>> to the winners of each tournament. The points, as well as the number
>>> of winners who can have the points, can vary depends on the number of
>>> the participants of each tournament.
>>> This could help many strong programs will participate most of the
>>> monthly tournaments.
>> I agreed that this would be a good thing, and intended to announce the rules before the July KGS bot tournament. I designed a scoring scheme, but did not much like it. So I delayed announcing it, and tinkered with the scoring scheme. I still did not much like it, so I delayed again and tinkered again. And again, and again.
>> What I have settled on is described at
>> I still do not like it. Its most obvious fault is that it is _far_ too complicated (the result of repeated tinkering). But further tinkering is not going to help. What is described on that page is what I am going to use, for this experimental half-year. For 2011, I will accept suggestions for improving and simplifying the scoring scheme.
>> The results so far, after three tournaments in this half year, are
>> 1st Zen on 12 points
>> 2nd Erica on 10 points
>> 3rd Many Faces on 6 points
>> 4th Aya on 5 points
>> 4th pachi on 5 points
>> 6th Fueg on 1 point
>> 6th MoGo on 1 point
>> Nick Wedd nick at maproom.co.uk
>> Computer-go mailing list
>> Computer-go at dvandva.org
> Computer-go mailing list
> Computer-go at dvandva.org
More information about the Computer-go