Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:38:37 10/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2000 at 12:46:27, Joshua Lee wrote: >Since you can't compare them by playing each other what about comparing >printouts? Are there any printouts that have NPS Depth line etc. If i had this i >would attempt. I did look at a game against Chiptest where CB had 14 Ne6 but >played Na4<-- not the losing move but not as good as Ne6 CB get's a queen Vs 3 >minor pieces which is not easy but it would be alot better than the situation >before if CB could keep his queen on and exchange rooks it makes it easier. As >Black's only chances would be to obtain a new queen not likely. So the outcome >is probably a draw but this is just my guess. To see this move for Crafty would >be over 14Ply on my 800Mhz Athlon just to give you some idea. If you can >elaborate on CB's earlier versions and how they played maybe this will answer my >questions and help you to improve on crafty. > > >Sometimes it's all about asking the right question. > >thank you Actually I did this a couple of years ago and posted the results in r.g.c.c I believe. I took a couple of the world championship 1986 games (the wc won by CB for the second time in a row) and had Crafty 'annotate' the games. It was uncanny how they agreed tactically. Of course, 1986 CB was doing maybe 100-200K nodes per second max, so crafty had a big edge in speed. But it found _zero_ tactical mistakes by CB. I analyzed the games partly in a discussion with Chris Whittington where he was into the usual mode of criticizing Cray Blitz for any reason. He picked on one particular move as looking foolish. Someone else pointed out that CSTal played the _same_ move, as it was tactically forced to avoid losing a pawn, but of course that didn't make any difference. I became interested in how Crafty would compare. I gave crafty more time than CB had, using faster hardware than CB had (1986 hardware for CB, remember), and it couldn't find any move it would label as a mistake or oversight. CB was tactically very strong. In most positional cases the two programs were in agreement as well, which is not surprising since I wrote both. The main advantage CB might have had back then was far faster hardware than anything I might run Crafty on in 1986. Of course Crafty would have run on a Cray back then, but it would have been far slower as Crafty is not vectorized while CB was. I suspect there is not a lot of difference in the two programs today. CB might have a tactical edge due to singular extensions and a bit of selectiveness near the leaf positions, while crafty probably has more positional (particularly endgame) knowledge (excepting king safety where CB was clearly better).
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.