Hacker News Reader

Comment by oezi | Hacker News Reader

Elo 1400 seems to equate to a top 30% player.

Source: https://chessgrandmonkey.com/chess-rating-percentile-calcula...

slight nit: this is true amongst all chess players. amongst professionals and amateurs, 1400 is technically Class C - which is on the lower end of amateurs.

nonetheless, it's cool to see a model 'generally intelligent' enough to beat most players. what's more interesting to me is that according to OP's analysis, GPT4 is worse at Chess than GPT3.5...

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_rating_system

It would depend how often did this happen:

> Occasionally it does make an illegal move

Since it would lose every game in which it made more than a single illegal move.

Well it can't have happened more than 6 times since illegal moves counted as a forfeit and it only lost 6 games.

That’s a bit meaningless without implied population. And it doesn’t tell you much because it depends so much on the particulars (how many years people in that group spent on chess, how serious they are). I would guess that’s quite different for FIDE and online chess.

Intuitively, I would guess 1400 is the rating of an average kid who spent a year studying chess seriously.

Not the ELO of the average kid who spends a year studying chess seriously? It's very difficult to define the average kid without context.

It's been a while since I read a global demographics update, but not all that long ago the mode child would have been living on $2 a day.

Sure, it’s tricky, but I feel it’s more coherent than “all chess players”.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com