What's YOUR Match-up Rate?

(The subject of move match-up rates came up in another thread, and it caught my interest.)

I just ran my match-up rates, and I'm shocked. My 1st choice m/u is 50%, and my top 3 m/u is 85%. I expected it to be much lower. (My USCF rating is in the 1200s, for God's sake.)

I haven't played any RHP games in a while, and I only have 26 total.

I excluded the opening phase of the games where I knew I was still in theory. (Sadly, usually only 4 or 5 moves deep at most. I think I may have played 1 or 2 games where I actually consulted opening books.) I did run the m/u rates to the end of all games.

To all you guys that follow these things - Do these numbers sound about right for someone with an RHP rating of about 1680 that takes a lot of time on his moves? Or will I now be labeled a scummy cheater? (For the record, I have never cheated in chess, either here or elsewhere. Scout's honor!)

So funny that you did that, because after reading the other thread I was bored and ran the 8 games that I have that qualify min rating 2000.

my matchup rates were
62% 82% using 2008 big base
58% 78% using my openings analysis and my database of 6.5 mil games. 3 of my 8 games there was no difference in my prep and a generic database.

Also interesting is that in my games my opponents matchups were
65% 83%

My record in these games was +3 -3 =2 were in two games I had massive blunders, one was a missed win (+9) that I blundered down to +0 (i won 30 moves later.. ughh.) and the biggest blunder I resigned thinking I had blundered a minor piece in an ending when in fact I had a tactical resource I overlooked.

This is just a question of not understanding the match rate methodology.
Anyone can match highly in a single or few cherry-picked games.

Take Kramnik's match rate from game 10 in the controversial 2006 FIDE World Championships:

Fritz 11 @ 30 seconds per move
4x AMD Phenom 2.30Ghz
4GB DDR2 RAM
Hash Table 512MB
Database used www.chesslive.de

[Event "World Championship"]
[Site "Elista"]
[Date "2006.09.23"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Kramnik, Vladimir"]
[Black "Topalov, Veselin"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E08"]
[PlyCount "85"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. g3 Bb4+ 5. Bd2 Be7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O c6 8. Bf4
Nbd7 9. Qc2 a5 10. Rd1 Nh5 11. Bc1 b5 12. cxd5 {Takes game out of book; 2nd}
cxd5 {1st} 13. e4 {1st} dxe4 {Not in top 3} 14. Qxe4 {1st} Rb8 {3rd} 15. Qe2 {
1st} Nhf6 {2nd} 16. Bf4 {1st} Rb6 {1st} 17. Ne5 {1st} Nd5 {1st} 18. Bxd5 {1st}
exd5 {1st} 19. Nc3 {1st} Nf6 {Not in top 3} 20. Nxb5 {1st} Ba6 {1st} 21. a4 {
1st} Ne4 {2nd} 22. Rdc1 {1st} Qe8 {1st} 23. Rc7 {Not in top 3} Bd8 {1st} 24.
Ra7 {3rd} f6 {Not in top 3} 25. Nd7 {1st} Rf7 {1st} 26. Nxb6 {1st} Rxa7 {1st}
27. Nxd5 {1st} Rd7 {1st} 28. Ndc3 {1st} Rxd4 {Not in top 3} 29. Re1 {2nd} f5 {
1st} 30. Qc2 {1st} Rb4 {1st} 31. Nd5 {2nd} Rxb5 {1st} 32. axb5 {1st} Qxb5 {1st}
33. Nc7 {3rd} Qc4 {2nd} 34. Qd1 {2nd} Bxc7 {1st} 35. Qd7 {1st} h6 {1st} 36.
Qxc7 {2nd} Qb4 {3rd} 37. Qb8+ {1st} Qxb8 {1st} 38. Bxb8 {1st} Nd2 {3rd} 39. Ra1
{1st} g5 {Not in top 3} 40. f4 {1st} Nb3 {1st} 41. Ra3 {2nd} Bc4 {1st} 42. Bc7
{2nd} g4 {Not in top 3} 43. Bxa5 {1st} 1-0

Result:
White: Kramnik
Top 1 Match: 22/32 (68,8% )
Top 2 Match: 29/32 (90,6% )
Top 3 Match: 31/32 (96,9% )

Black: Topalov
Top 1 Match: 19/31 (61,3% )
Top 2 Match: 22/31 (71,0% )
Top 3 Match: 25/31 (80,6% )

And yet Kramnik couldn't sustain such engine-like play throughout the matches - here are his total results from the 2006 WC. I also include Topalov's results & he was accused of consulting an engine at various stages during this match:

Kramnik (14 games)
Top 1 Match: 306/552 (55,4% )
Top 2 Match: 417/552 (75,5% )
Top 3 Match: 461/552 (83,5% )

Topalov (14 games)
Top 1 Match: 309/555 (55,7% )
Top 2 Match: 417/555 (75,1% )
Top 3 Match: 447/555 (80,5% )

If you can achieve match rates in 20 objectively chosen games vs quality opposition (let's say RHP 2000+ rated) which all have 20 or more non-theory moves which surpass the benchmark thresholds, then you play more engine-like chess than any unassisted player so far tested.

Either that or you're a cheating ^%£*&^% 😉

Originally posted by nimzo5
So funny that you did that, because after reading the other thread I was bored and ran the 8 games that I have that qualify min rating 2000.

my matchup rates were
62% 82% using 2008 big base
58% 78% using my openings analysis and my database of 6.5 mil games. 3 of my 8 games there was no difference in my prep and a generic database.

Also interesting ...[text shortened]... I had blundered a minor piece in an ending when in fact I had a tactical resource I overlooked.

Originally posted by nimzo5
So funny that you did that, because after reading the other thread I was bored and ran the 8 games that I have that qualify min rating 2000.

my matchup rates were
62% 82% using 2008 big base
58% 78% using my openings analysis and my database of 6.5 mil games. 3 of my 8 games there was no difference in my prep and a generic database.

Also interesting ...[text shortened]... I had blundered a minor piece in an ending when in fact I had a tactical resource I overlooked.

I have only found 8 so far that I have found that fit your criteria, but I am still looking.

Originally posted by Zygalski
nimzo5
If you like I can analyse 20 of your games which meet the basic criteria.
The games I'll select will be the 20 most recent vs 2000+ rateds which all have 20 or more non-www.chesslive.de moves.
I can even publish the end results here if you like. I'm certain that they will be well under the thresholds, since you don't consult an engine in any of your games 🙂

Hallo,

can somebody pass on a link or quickly describe how to do this analysis in a convenient manner? Is there already a program online, where you just past in a PGN for analysis or will it be hand-done always?

I am curious, but also very lazy and don't know, if it makes sense when playing around 1700...

t

edit: madrook, got some advice to save time?

Thread 114715

thanks, this thread really is a good guide...

but one hour for one game... i feel my laziness...

Originally posted by tharkesh
Hallo,

can somebody pass on a link or quickly describe how to do this analysis in a convenient manner? Is there already a program online, where you just past in a PGN for analysis or will it be hand-done always?

I am curious, but also very lazy and don't know, if it makes sense when playing around 1700...

t

edit: madrook, got some advice to save time?

Originally posted by Mad Rook
(The subject of move match-up rates came up in another thread, and it caught my interest.)

I just ran my match-up rates, and I'm shocked. My 1st choice m/u is 50%, and my top 3 m/u is 85%. I expected it to be much lower. (My USCF rating is in the 1200s, for God's sake.)

I haven't played any RHP games in a while, and I only have 26 total.

I excluded ...[text shortened]... r? (For the record, I have never cheated in chess, either here or elsewhere. Scout's honor!)

Originally posted by Zygalski
Can you post the links to the games you analysed?
I'd be interested to look at them.

Ok, I'll batch analyse them & discount the games with less than 20 non-database moves from the end results.
As you say, playing games with a few moves once out of book vs weaker opposition, or simply playing a drawn-out easily won game can skew results, but it will be interesting to see what happens...

Originally posted by Zygalski
Fritz 11 @ 30 seconds per move
4x AMD Phenom 2.30Ghz
4GB DDR2 RAM
Hash Table 512MB
Database used www.chesslive.de