When I was stronger (ratings old and new)

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
Reinfeld
Member
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:54 am
Location: Tacoma, WA

When I was stronger (ratings old and new)

Post by Reinfeld »

Here's where our dedicated friends stood in 1993
(note how many big players haven't arrived yet):

http://www.anacadigital.com/dedicados/l ... _1993.html

Arbitrary stuff:

1. Matched against today's values using active from Wiki-Elo, not SSDF.
2. Left out a number of Mephisto variants for brevity's sake and to emphasize different programmers.


TASC R30 (using 2.2)
1993: 2558
2012: 2377
(-181)

Mephisto Lyon 68030
1993: 2468
2012: 2337
(-131)

Mephisto RISC 1MB
1993: 2444
2012: 2258
(-186)

RISC 2500
1993: 2439
2012: 2244
(-195)

Fidelity Mach IV/Designer 2325
(Claimed: 2325)
1993: 2276
2012: 2126
(-150)

Novag Diablo/Scorpio
1993: 2201
2012: 2038
(-163)

Fidelity Mach III
1993: 2189
2012: 2020
(-169)

Novag Super Expert/Forte C
1993: 2138
2012: 2020
(-118)

Milano
1993: 2152
2012: 2005
(-147)

GK 2000
1993: 2111
2012: 1973
(-138)

Excellence/Designer 2000:
1993: 1952
2012: 1828
(-124)

Radio Shack 2150L
1993: 1927
2012: 1720
(-207)

Super Connie
1993: 1917
2012: 1787
(-130)

OBSERVATIONS:

1. Everybody drops 100-200 points - more if you use SSDF numbers, but basically the same range. Plainly a function of more data. Also a byproduct of more machines emerging within a narrow zone of strength, driving down the averages.

2. Standard warnings apply. Computer vs computer ratings (SSDF) not an ideal measure, lack of information about human opponents, fewer games, vs more games, etc. I understand - however, this is the available data.

3. Far fewer Morsch machines in play two decades ago. The clone wars haven't started. Note that Morsch's best machine remains the Atlanta.

4. It would be interesting to see all CLAIMED values for these machines, if only to settle the side argument about which company inflates its ratings most. General chatter seems to lean Novag.

- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
Reinfeld
Member
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:54 am
Location: Tacoma, WA

Post by Reinfeld »

Should have added this one, the last of the unaltered Fidelitys:

Fidelity Elite v10 68040
1993: 2377
2012: 2164
(-213)

If you're a purist, this machine appears to be the pinnacle of the brand. Two decades ago, it was the seventh-strongest machine in the world. Now it's ranked at 50.

- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
Larry
Senior Member
Posts: 2272
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:42 am
Location: Gosford, NSW Australia

Post by Larry »

Looking on the rating list, I see a Mephisto Portugal 32 bit .
I must confess I've never heard of it.
Is this the former name for the Portorose?
Larry
User avatar
chessguru
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:33 am
Contact:

Re: When I was stronger (ratings old and new)

Post by chessguru »

Hi,
Reinfeld wrote:Here's where our dedicated friends stood in 1993
(note how many big players haven't arrived yet):

http://www.anacadigital.com/dedicados/l ... _1993.html
sorry, these values are USCF ratings.

The Wiki-ELO values are based on the FIDE standards. If you are used to USCF ratings, you must add 100-150 ELO points.

Best regards,
Micha
Post Reply