[Computer-go] Series Champion of the KGS bot tournaments

Michael Williams 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
>> http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/annual/index.html
>> 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
>> --
>> Nick Wedd    nick at maproom.co.uk
>> _______________________________________________
>> Computer-go mailing list
>> Computer-go at dvandva.org
>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
> _______________________________________________
> Computer-go mailing list
> Computer-go at dvandva.org
> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
>



More information about the Computer-go mailing list