Talk:Chess engine rating lists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chess engine rating lists article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chess. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Chess Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-Importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Old Comments 2 First and second place 3 Removed Per Elbaek Jorgensen's list 4 Removed Kurt Utzinger's list 5 Merge with Chess engine? 6 WBEC question marks

[edit] Old Comments

1. "engine" should not be caps
2. Unless this is expanded, I think it should be merged with chess engine
3. Using WikiTable seems to make it put the table at the end of the page. It needs to be a regular table up in the main body. Bubba73 (talk), 00:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
4. All the references should be dated. Done. GregorB (talk) 19:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] First and second place

Should we include different versions of the same engine (e.g. Rybka 2.3.1 and Rybka 1.2)? I've omitted Rybka 1.2 in the SSDF reference... GregorB (talk) 13:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Different versions of the same engine now omitted throughout the list. GregorB (talk) 13:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Per Elbaek Jorgensen's list

For the following reasons:

1. Hardware used is not specified
2. Time controls used are not specified
3. Does not feature the most recent versions of notable engines
4. Not dated - it's unclear how old it is
5. Not too comprehensive (22 engines and 4620 games - compare with other lists)
6. The games are apparently not available for download

Therefore, not of much use as a reliable source. GregorB (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Kurt Utzinger's list

See previous section - same reasons except for #2 and perhaps #5.

Not really removed for now, only commented out. GregorB (talk) 15:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Now really removed. Quisinsky's list is on the way; it looks as if it's abandoned. GregorB (talk) 21:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with Chess engine?

After some pruning, there are fewer lists left, but the article could still be expanded somewhat: e.g. how these lists are compiled, what are the most important differences between them, and how reliable are the results. I'm considering expanding it, and then we'll see - if it's not too long, then it's probably best merged with chess engine. GregorB (talk) 20:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, as I commented in 2/07, unless it can be expanded I think it needs to be merged, as you say. And perhaps it should be merged even if it is expanded. Bubba73 (talk), 23:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WBEC question marks

Why question marks in the WBEC entry?

1. The list is not dated. I assume that it was formed after the last game in the 14th tournament, but that is not easy to determine.
2. It's unclear how many engines (i.e. versions of engines) participated and how many games were played. The rating list is "pure" (single entry per engine, older/weaker versions removed), but many more games were played. How many exactly is again not easy to determine; there isn't a complete list. At any rate, figures cited are low.

I wish Leo Dijksman, the author of the WBEC list, would fix these issues. If by any chance he is reading this... GregorB (talk) 12:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)