Author: Lanny DiBartolomeo
Date: 22:48:25 07/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 29, 2000 at 01:23:29, Derrick Wilson wrote: >On July 28, 2000 at 22:08:03, Lanny DiBartolomeo wrote: > >>On July 28, 2000 at 21:08:38, Lanny DiBartolomeo wrote: >> >>>On July 28, 2000 at 05:21:49, Derrick Wilson wrote: >>> >>>>On July 28, 2000 at 03:32:42, Lanny DiBartolomeo wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 28, 2000 at 03:20:29, Derrick Wilson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 28, 2000 at 01:16:36, Lanny DiBartolomeo wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On July 28, 2000 at 00:58:14, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I made comparison between Carson's latest human list and SSDF to clear >>>>>>>>possible level difference. But it's very difficult, when there are not many >>>>>>>>exactly same software and hardware combinations. I removed multiprosessor >>>>>>>>results and made assumption, that difference between 200MMX and 450 Mhz is 79p >>>>>>>>(for comp-comp, sure not for human-comp). Here's some figures: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Program average speed Against humans SSDF rating difference >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rebel 431Mhz 2549/33 games 2594 (200MMX+79p) -45 >>>>>>>> Fritz6 500Mhz 2457/15 2721 (450) -264 >>>>>>>> Hiarcs6 272Mhz 2573/20 2518 (200MMX) +55 >>>>>>>> Shredder 500Mhz 2495/8 2676 (450) -181 >>>>>>>> CM5/6K 375Mhz 2521/14 2653 (200MMX+79p) -132 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>This means, that average difference (Against human - SSDF rating) is -85p. >>>>>>>>(Weighted difference for all 90 games). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I think this confirms general feeling, that SSDF must drop level by 100 points. >>>>>>>>Counting these multiprosessor Junior/Fritz may still lower level. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I this this kind of list is much more reasonable than current: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1 Fritz 6.0 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2621 >>>>>>>> 2 Junior 6.0 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2589 >>>>>>>> 3 Chess Tiger 12.0 DOS 128MB K6-2 450 2571 >>>>>>>> 4 Fritz 5.32 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2554 >>>>>>>> 5 Nimzo 7.32 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2553 >>>>>>>> 6 Junior 5.0 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2526 >>>>>>>> 6 Hiarcs 7.32 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2526 >>>>>>>> 8 Crafty 17.07/CB 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2524 >>>>>>>> 9 Nimzo 99 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2523 >>>>>>>> 10 Hiarcs 7.32 64MB P200 MMX 2477 >>>>>>>> 11 Fritz 5.32 64MB P200 MMX 2475 >>>>>>>> 12 Chessmaster 6000 64MB P200 MMX 2474 >>>>>>>> 13 Hiarcs 7.0 64MB P200 MMX 2460 >>>>>>>> 13 Fritz 5.0 PB29% 67MB P200 MMX 2460 >>>>>>>> 15 Nimzo 99 64MB P200 MMX 2449 >>>>>>>> 16 Junior 5.0 64MB P200 MMX 2437 >>>>>>>> 17 Nimzo 98 58MB P200 MMX 2425 >>>>>>>> 18 Rebel 9.0 47MB P200 MMX 2420 >>>>>>>> 19 Hiarcs 6.0 49MB P200 MMX 2418 >>>>>>>> 20 Rebel 8.0 51MB P200 MMX 2410 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Jouni >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yes, but if you leave Fritz6 on top it is too inflated compared to human games, >>>>>>> and dropping hiarcs rating would be a problem as well since it earned its >>>>>>>rating 2573, it seems like the damage is done and you need a separate ratings >>>>>>>list for comps vs human. I do not think you can just lower the ratings straight >>>>>>>across the board. >>>>>>> Lanny >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What evidence do you have that Fritz6 rating would be inflated? I hope your >>>>>>not going by the few games played at the israeli league? >>>>> >>>>>did you look at the text that was posted above? , then you should see what >>>>>"evidence" I am going by. fritz6 500mhz 2457/15 against humans an against >>>>>computers is 2721 , if this is correct or not ask Jouni those are the numbers >>>>>given and I am giving an opinion off of the numbers given. >>>> >>>> >>>> In other words you don't care whatever or not the figures are accurate you >>>>don't mind making assumptions on Data that has not proven to be reliable?? >>> >>Sorry for otherresponse tomuch coffee??) To answer in a more mature tone, I do >>not mind making assumptions based on data even if not true, I would make the >>assumption and then I would also state I didnt feel the data was correct. I did >>check with ssdf because I was wondering why Chessmaster and rebel was rated >>higher on this list , then realised it was because they are using stronger >>proccessors here. For the other list,I followed a lot of the games from before >>and figure be true and since I do not have time to scour up the games and >>recheck all the wins and losses of the 90 games in the message I didnt feel it >>to be a bad thing at all to give an opinion based on the data above. >> Thanks , >> Lanny > > > No offense was intended, I tried to give you a private response by email, but >apparently your email address is not current. Thanks :) my e-mail is lanny1@netzero.net I am setting my e-mail up to date.
This page took 0 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.