From: sloan@cis.uab.edu (Kenneth Sloan)
Subject: Re: CM3000 and CM2100 rating feature
Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:14:21 GMT

In article <Daniel_Marsalone.1amp@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US> Daniel_Marsalone@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Daniel Marsalone) writes:
>     I have a question about the rating feature of CM3000. I started
>playing chess seriously (i.e. tournaments, and books) in January of 1992. I
>have played about twenty rated games and my rating is approximately 1400.

Hmmm - USCF seems to think that it's 1314/17.  I suppose that's
"approximately 1400 based on approximately 20 games".

>... I
>haven't played a rated game in months. In the last tournament I was in, I
>won against an 1850 player and a bunch of mid 1500 guys. In fact, I have
>also played in informal tournaments and have beaten 1600 guys and a 1700.
>Basically what I'm trying to get across is that during my last six rated
>games and last nine informal tournament games, I haven't lost to anyone
>under 1700. Of course I haven't played anyone over 1800. The whole point of
>this is to say that I don't think that my 1400 rating is all that accurate.

Many players show a dramatic rise in rating over the first year.  You
don't mention any losses or draws in those last 6 games.  Assuming that
you beat 1 1850 player and 5 1550 players, your performance rating for
these 6 games would be 2000.  Pretty good.

But...if my pencil scratchings are correct (always a ricky assumption),
that means that your performance for your first 11 games was 1031/11.  A
jump from 1031 to 2000 is very impressive!

>Now having said that let me get to my question.
>
>    I have CM3000 and have used the rating feature. When my uncle did
>challenge set two he was rated at 1866. When I took challenge set three I
>got 2053. Now, I my uncle, my father and I play every day. I do beat my
>uncle about 70%-80% of the timeBut is the rating that the CM3000 gives
>accurate? 

Well, 75% works out to a rating difference of about 190 points.
2053-1866 = 187.  And, 2053 is consistent with your most recent
tournament. Amazingly close.  I still want to know what drug you were on
for your first 11 games...

>...Neither of us had taken any of the tests before. I got my uncle
>to take it just to see what che was rated and then he wanted to see what I
>got, so I took it. By the way, my uncle doesn't and hasn't played in any
>tournaments. He just plays my pop, me, and CM2100 on his computer at work.
>I think that those ratings seem rather high but I do realize that my
>current UCSF rating is not really definative of my chess strength. 

A familiar refrain.  Backed up by your most recent results, to be sure -
but something is strange about your apparent 1000 point improvement.
Quick!  Enter every U1400 section you can find over the next few months.

>    Also, how does the rating on CM2100 work? Do you need to play it at
>tournament mode for it to work right or will it compensate the rating if
>you play it on advanced mode at the time per move options (i.e. 5sec per
>move, one minute per move)?
> 

Don't know, sorry.  But, from your report it seems to work exceedingly
well.  Please report back in a year, and lt us know what your established
rating is after another 4-5 tournaments.

By the way - since you mention an uncle and your 'pop' - it seems
relevant to ask your age.  Rapid improvement is especially likely in
young players.  (Even so, 1000 points is incredible.  What books did you
read? At this rate, you will be ready for Kasparov by September...)


-- 
Kenneth Sloan                   Computer and Information Sciences
sloan@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213                  115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station 
(205) 934-5473 FAX              Birmingham, AL 35294-1170