Martin Brown wrote:
I am not convinced that scoring human GMs by how closely their play
resembles any particular named chess engine has merit. Perhaps
ranking them by percentage blunder rate might be meaningful though
(and well within the capability of any good chess engine). It is
surprising how effective blunder check can be even on GM level games
given sufficient time.

What do you mean by `percentage blunder rate'? The proportion of the
time that the GM plays a move that the engine thinks is, say, more
than one pawn worse than the best move? How does that make a
difference?


Dave.

--
David Richerby Frozen Book (TM): it's like a romantic
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ novel but it's frozen in a block
of ice!