Author: Pete Galati
Date: 22:31:17 04/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 23, 2000 at 00:48:44, Chessfun wrote: >On April 22, 2000 at 14:46:28, Pete Galati wrote: > >>On April 22, 2000 at 15:02:19, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On April 22, 2000 at 14:49:59, Pete Galati wrote: >>> >>>>On April 22, 2000 at 14:20:57, A.L.Mourik wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hello dear CCC friends, >>>>> >>>>>Although earlier reports from e.g. Jouni Uski, suggest an enormous increase in >>>>>strenght for Crafty 17.10 >>>>>Nuun 2 match result Fritz6 against Crafty 17.10 ends in a very clear >>>>>29,5-10,5!! victory for Fritz6. >>>>>Played on PII 400 8mb for HT, Timecontrol 5 min + 3 sec per move. >>>> >>>>There isn't generally an enormous increase in strength from version to version >>>>of any program, that's unrealistic to expect there to be. >>>> >>>>Your time controls are a bit short there. >>>> >>>>Pete >>> >>> >>>Why didn't you say or ask that of Jouni when he posted? >>>as all he said was blitz, that may even have been faster >>>than this. >>>Thanks. >> >>Sorry, I don't read all posts, this one caught my eye because it was at the top >>of the board. > > >You had posted in the thread I referred to. >Which was Sensation Crafty 17-10 beats F6a in nunn1 . > You'd need to post the html of the post where I responded to that, setting the filters at 7 days and doing a search for "Sensation Crafty 17-10" does not turn anything up. I don't recall responding in such a thread. But if you're attempting to put me on trial for some comment that I may or may not have made about Crafty, then you simply have too much time on your hands. Pete > >>If Jouni played some games this fast or faster, then my opinion would be the >>same, it's too fast. That isn't to say that I have not run games at that speed, >>I have, and they were too fast to judge the strength of a program. > > >None of the Crafty supporters (for lack of a better word) at that >point asked what the time control was or made the statement that >it's optimized for longer time controls. > >All posting took the results at face value, wheras IMO the result >is not possible nor reproducable, that is once the actual time control >that produced those results is stated. > >If I find otherwise naturally I would retract that statement. > >Thanks. > > > > >>Pete
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.