3 ms·
That's interesting. Do you have a source for that? I always believed it is because either FIDE ratings are only updated once a month (see 7.1[1]) or because th
by fwn 8y ago
That's interesting. Do you have a source for that?
I always believed it is because either FIDE ratings are only updated once a month (see 7.1[1]) or because their ELO is too close, therefore the prob. of winning is 0.5 for both anyways.
[1] http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=172&view=article http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=172&view=article
- yesenadam 8y agoThat's not true about Elo being updated particularly at the end of tournaments - either official/FIDE ratings or live ratings. I heard (possibly from the Chess24 commentators) that if their difference in rating was 4 or more, each draw would bring them closer together in live rating - Magnus would lose rating with each draw; but as it's 3, their ratings don't change. i.e. anacleto was right, thomasahle wrong. Also, Elo isn't an acronym (ELO) as one might think - it's named after its inventor Arpad Elo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system Interestingly, when I first looked at this page, most of the good/correct comments were voted down, most of the bad ones not, it was weird. (It made me suspect that other HN pages are like that but I don't know it! - I know chess better than most subjects discussed on here) But that has now almost totally been corrected.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- iainmerrick 8y agoCould it just be that the most recent comments were listed first? I think HN does that to give them a chance to get read and voted on.