Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 07:41:56 05/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2000 at 09:06:55, blass uri wrote: >The question is what do you want to compare. Yes that's true, which wasn't entirely clear IMO. I only see a lot of blitz results and a few standard games that can't be compared correctly. >I agree that they cannot be used for strength assessment in different positions >but I think that comparing programs in the nunn match is interesting. Yes and I've never said otherwise. It's just wrong to assume that Nunn positions are better or more fair than any other set available. >I do not think that learning had a big influence on the results. Maybe not, but you don't know. If you run successive blitz matches (20-80 games) and forget to clear learning then you're in trouble, especially if you compare them with results where you did remember to clear learning. That should be _very_ obvious. I've asked twice if the learning was cleared consistently during blitz matches, no answer has yet been offered. >The different results 9:0 for Fritz and 11:9 for crafty were because of the fact >that one engine was slower and the usual result is about 15:5 That's is your opinion and not a fact at all. None of the unusual results were explained properly. Due to statistics there's no such thing as an usual result. You should know better. 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.