Author: Uri Blass
Date: 05:35:12 03/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 08, 2001 at 08:28:53, Bertil Eklund wrote: >On March 07, 2001 at 21:29:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On March 07, 2001 at 16:52:41, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On March 07, 2001 at 00:19:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On March 06, 2001 at 22:45:11, Chessfun wrote: >>>>> >>>>>The fact that Thorsten's are closer to the WMCCC neither makes it better nor the >>>>>results more trustworthy. I would believe the SSDF or Enrique's results >>>>>more than either the WMCCC or Thorsten's tourney run as it is. The number of >>>>>games played and the fact that those programs are available to all users being >>>>>the main reasons. >>>>> >>>>>In Thorsten's current tourney for example there are programs running whose >>>>>settings are unknown such as Shredder 4 chessbits and Genius 6.5 Czub style. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>this is no different from the dozens of other basement tournaments that >>>>get reported here. 500 different chessmaster personalities. tournaments >>>>with oddball books. Tournaments with the nunn starting positions. All >>>>are interesting. each is no more or less valuable than the others... >>> >>> >>>There are slight differences. Typically posters of those CM basement >>>tourneys do post the settings of the different engines. I have never seen >>>a tournament from any Nunn starting positions, matches yes, but tourneys would >>>be interesting. >>> >>>Again as I have said it is his tourney to run as he sees fit even the current >>>change of Fritz 6 to Deep Fritz two totally different programs. Now what happens >>>at the end a little note...1. Deep Fritz was Fritz 6b through 3 rounds. >>>etc etc. >>> >>> >>>>>Further a program in any of it's modified forms can win the WMCCC 10 years in a >>>>>row and I would still trust the SSDF results as being more accurate. They play >>>>>more games and use the exact software available to anyone. >>>>> >>>>>This question now though about Enrique's the WMCCC and Thorsten's tournaments >>>>>ignores your earlier statement which is what I originally responded to about the >>>>>SSDF. That their results are more representative of the user product plus >>>>>my previous statement that there never was any proof that anything irregular >>>>>happened. >>>>> >>>>>Sarah. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>It is hard to prove things when _all_ games are not publicly available. I >>>>personally don't care myself, as it doesn't really matter to me since I don't >>>>sell a chess product and don't depend on their rating list for advertising >>>>my chess engine to increase sales. >>>> >>>>In any case, I see no reason to grumble about adding new versions as they >>>>become available. Since it is no different than every other computer chess >>>>event that has been held where programmers attend. >>> >>> >>>This statement is fine, as I said originally I joined this thread after you >>>statement about the SSDF which it nows appears you are removing. >> >>Not at all. So far as I recall, the SSDF _did_ test a version of fritz that >>you could _not_ buy. I also believe they have accepted other bugfixes from time >>to time, but I'm not the one to answer for them. Perhaps they can respond since >>several of the testers are regular posters here? > >Hi! > >It was the same version of Fritz5/16 but with a working autoplayer. >There was also some other well-known persons that received the auto232 version >of F5. It is about the same as that some people received Rebel10 with autoplayer >but SSDF didn't. >We accept bug-fixes if they are publically available in example Hiarcs7 to 7.01 >or the fix for the Tiger12-book. > >Bertil SSDF If I remember correctly there was at least one case when Fritz5(with the autoplayer) amd Fritz5(without the autoplayer) did not play the same move. I am not sure if it was about Fritz5 but I am sure it was about the autoplayer. I think that Enrique can give more details. Uri
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.