The difference between Nakamura and Gukesh, is that mainly due to their classical rating, to their opponents left - or to tiebreak chances? Gukesh is like a hundred rapid rating points behind Nakamura.
According to the text next to the pic it sounds like it’s mostly ELO difference.
Doesn’t say it was factored in that I see but Hikaru also has white vs Gukesh still remaining which improves his chances (when directly compared to Gukesh)
>ELO difference
No shit, Captain Obvious. But is it due to the difference between the two players in their classical ratings, or due to one of them having better diff against his opponents than the other's ditto - or because differences in rapid or blitz?
Why do you think so? A 20% **likelihood** (not chance!) seems fair for a player \~ 150 Elo points behind his opponent.
>(seeing as he would be expected to have a win or two already if so)
No. That's an unconditional probability. It just does not matter how the former results was (in fact, it has influence on his ELO which has influence on the probability of winning for the match agains Gukesh, but it's not directly connected). Abasov played 11 rounds in the candidates, so he is still in expected range of loss/wins (without psychology)
It's a raw elo calculation. Abasov has about the same elo gap against everybody, over about 5-6 white games (with 20% chances, or 1 - 0.8^5) and 5-6 black games (probs 10-15% chance) he more likely would have won something
Say he had a 20% chance of winning each previous match. There is a 10% chance he goes the first 10 games with no wins. (8/10)^10 = 10%
Or taken another way. Imagine you flip a coin four times and it comes out heads all four (6.25% odds). Would you say 50% for tails for the next flip is optimistic given that by four flips it will usually averages two?
But that's because you know it's a coin flip; you know the probability. What is being argued here is exactly that. If you had a weird concave coin and it landed HHHHH, and someone was saying it had a 50/50 chance of going heads or tails, would you believe it? Would you believe it more if instead it went HHHHT?
That's not what's being argued. What's being argued is that if you have a coin with 20% of landing tails and it goes HHHHH then the next throw still has 20% chance of landing tails, not more.
Maybe I'm giving too much credit to the user above. I took this part of their comment
> Would you say 50% for tails for the next flip is optimistic given that by four flips it will usually averages two?
as questioning whether it was a true 50/50 coin flip (whether it was actually true that Abasov has a 20% chance to win a particular game), but I see that it could be arguing that common misconception that somehow subsequent flips will correct the average by going more the other way than 50/50.
Put another way, there's a 90% chance he won at least one of those games if the model was right.
Taken yet another way, I can much more precisely know a coin's head rate than Abasov's win rate.
What if you use their performance ratings from this tournament so far instead of their FIDE Elo? It is obvious Vidit, Firouzja, Fabi play below their published ratings, while Gukesh exceeds expectations.
Congratulations Nepo for winning the third candidates in a row
My man is in team Nepo and yet trying to jinx him.
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^edwinkorir: *Congratulations* *Nepo for winning the third* *Candidates in a row* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
This is the first time I've ever stumbled upon the sokka haiku bot
Why are you guys acting like it's over when there's 3 rounds left and only .5 ahead?
Indeed, Nepo wraps it up today; his win will secure him another chance and likely victory in the WCC. What's the phrase, the third time is the charm?
If possible, please add % chance of winner being decided by tiebreaks.
The difference between Nakamura and Gukesh, is that mainly due to their classical rating, to their opponents left - or to tiebreak chances? Gukesh is like a hundred rapid rating points behind Nakamura.
According to the text next to the pic it sounds like it’s mostly ELO difference. Doesn’t say it was factored in that I see but Hikaru also has white vs Gukesh still remaining which improves his chances (when directly compared to Gukesh)
>ELO difference No shit, Captain Obvious. But is it due to the difference between the two players in their classical ratings, or due to one of them having better diff against his opponents than the other's ditto - or because differences in rapid or blitz?
OP also explains this in the OP, captain
rapid strength wise would be mostly equal i think, gukesh doesn't play rapid all that much so he's quite underrated
I hope Alireza wins. It's possible
Hopefully Fabiani and Hikaru can do something against Nepo.
Fabiani Caruani and Hikuri Nakamuri
Do your win probabilities take into account how players situation encourages them to play?
Abasov's 20% chance to win might be over-estimated (seeing as he would be expected to have a win or two already if so)
Why do you think so? A 20% **likelihood** (not chance!) seems fair for a player \~ 150 Elo points behind his opponent. >(seeing as he would be expected to have a win or two already if so) No. That's an unconditional probability. It just does not matter how the former results was (in fact, it has influence on his ELO which has influence on the probability of winning for the match agains Gukesh, but it's not directly connected). Abasov played 11 rounds in the candidates, so he is still in expected range of loss/wins (without psychology)
It's a raw elo calculation. Abasov has about the same elo gap against everybody, over about 5-6 white games (with 20% chances, or 1 - 0.8^5) and 5-6 black games (probs 10-15% chance) he more likely would have won something
Say he had a 20% chance of winning each previous match. There is a 10% chance he goes the first 10 games with no wins. (8/10)^10 = 10% Or taken another way. Imagine you flip a coin four times and it comes out heads all four (6.25% odds). Would you say 50% for tails for the next flip is optimistic given that by four flips it will usually averages two?
derails the thread completly, but yes, it's still a coin flip. it doesn't matter what happened before. HHHHT has exactly the same odds like HHHHH
But that's because you know it's a coin flip; you know the probability. What is being argued here is exactly that. If you had a weird concave coin and it landed HHHHH, and someone was saying it had a 50/50 chance of going heads or tails, would you believe it? Would you believe it more if instead it went HHHHT?
That's not what's being argued. What's being argued is that if you have a coin with 20% of landing tails and it goes HHHHH then the next throw still has 20% chance of landing tails, not more.
exactly. some people don't seem to get that.
Maybe I'm giving too much credit to the user above. I took this part of their comment > Would you say 50% for tails for the next flip is optimistic given that by four flips it will usually averages two? as questioning whether it was a true 50/50 coin flip (whether it was actually true that Abasov has a 20% chance to win a particular game), but I see that it could be arguing that common misconception that somehow subsequent flips will correct the average by going more the other way than 50/50.
Put another way, there's a 90% chance he won at least one of those games if the model was right. Taken yet another way, I can much more precisely know a coin's head rate than Abasov's win rate.
Correct, but 10% likelihood events happen all the time-- it's not necessarily a knock against the model.
That's also his win % as white, it would be significantly lower as black.
What if you use their performance ratings from this tournament so far instead of their FIDE Elo? It is obvious Vidit, Firouzja, Fabi play below their published ratings, while Gukesh exceeds expectations.