Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 14:28:13 05/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 06, 2000 at 16:51:45, blass uri wrote: >I disagree >The number of games is not the point but the question if you can believe the >results. There's quite a few reasons why you can't be sure about the validity of the games and I've mentioned quite a few of them. It is not possible to make any conclusions regarding strength, ponder or blitz vs. standard on the data published. Try thinking about this: 1) First it was an attempt to discredit the Jouni test. Failed because the parameters Jouni used was unknown at the time. 2) Ponder off vs. on. Comparing on one machine is uncertain, which she acknowledged so it's okay (she ran the games anyway(?)). Comparing ponder off on one machine with ponder on on two machines didn't work either due to the uncertainty introduced by autoplayer. 3) Blitz vs. standard. I haven't seen any publication of the complete set of standard games, so there might something interesting there. But it would depend on the comparable data. These problems and "minor" things like learning, Nunn, computer usage during test (thanks Tony), GUI and sample size makes any prediction of strength futile. The only data usable is X beats Y at Game/1 as far as I'm concerned. That isn't a lot compared to the effort. Since Chessfun refuses to discuss the issues at hand, I wouldn't mind hearing your thoughts. >There were some errors in the games when one computer was slowed down but the >same thing happened in the past also in the public ssdf games. I thought you said that you didn't have Fritz, so I assume that errors you've found only covers a small portion of all the possible errors. You don't have to check games to evaluate a test. If the test is okay _then_ you can check the games. >Most of the ssdf games are not public and it is impossible to get them. >I know that stefan (the programmer of shredder) wanted to get all the ssdf games >of shredder and could not get them. So? I think they know what they're doing. >I can imagine that there are more errors in the not public games because nobody >can check them. Well, you're speculating without proof. "Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try". >I trust chessfun's nunn match games more than the ssdf games because in the case >of the nunn match games everybody who wants the games to check if there is a >problem can get them. You're entitled to do that, but I think you're mistaken. Sincerely, Mogens
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.