Author: Graham Banks
Date: 03:59:06 05/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 20, 2001 at 06:05:09, stuart taylor wrote: >On May 20, 2001 at 05:17:41, Chessfun wrote: > >>On May 20, 2001 at 03:51:34, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>On May 20, 2001 at 03:38:30, Peter Berger wrote: >>> >>>>On May 20, 2001 at 03:18:56, stuart taylor wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 19, 2001 at 22:24:21, John Dahlem wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 19, 2001 at 21:51:18, stuart taylor wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 19, 2001 at 21:28:25, Eric Tom wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On May 19, 2001 at 19:06:11, stuart taylor wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On May 19, 2001 at 15:34:15, william penn wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>i suspect that cm6555 would still score among the top three, even against the >>>>>>>>>>best and newest programs. Cm8000 is a rip-off since there is a noticable >>>>>>>>>>decrease in strength from the previous more strong version 6000 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On what do you base that? >>>>>>>>>And is it stronger than 6000 or 7000? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>And if it is a rip off, can there be any compensation, or money-back? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>S.Taylor >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Compensation? Maybe the recent amazing personalities, such as CMUtzinger and >>>>>>>>CMFun can compensate, I don't know. I've recently fell in love with >>>>>>>>CM8_Bendorz. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Regards, >>>>>>>>Eric >>>>>>> >>>>>>>A clear weakening of playing strength makes it questionable as an "upgrade" in >>>>>>>my opinion. >>>>>>>All other extras and improvements should NEVER be at the expense of playing >>>>>>>strength, Unless specifically made clear. If it's simply not improved, that's >>>>>>>also not so good, but if it is EVEN WEAKER, then patches must patch up atleast >>>>>>>that! >>>>>>>I don't know if any other program was that much weaker than TWO upgrades >>>>>>>earlier! >>>>>>>S.Taylor >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>It's a _different_ engine, I don't know if they ever claimed it was stronger, >>>>>>and if they didn't, there is no reason to even _think_ of compensation. If they >>>>>>did, I personally still wouldn't feel cheated as long as the thing isn't some >>>>>>random mover or something like that (they added features, that is enough to call >>>>>>it a new version). Also, I haven't seen any cm6000-cm8000 matches published, >>>>>>and until someone does, I suggest everyone stop assuming 8000 is weaker than >>>>>>6000 anyway. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>John >>>>> >>>>>As I have said, There are sooo many results reported on this forum, that I don't >>>>>see we need to wait for something to be "published". >>>>>Next year will be too late to ask for a new patch for CM8000. >>>>>S.Taylor >>>> >>>>I don't follow - I have read several of the Chessmaster posts, too and haven't >>>>seen anything suggesting that CM8000 _isn't_ much stronger than CM6000 . >>>> >>>>IMHO there are two possible explanations for the disappointment with the CM8000 >>>>results : >>>> >>>>a.) CM loses some match - then an alternative personality is created and >>>>surprise : it scores better - then this personality is tested . >>>> >>>>Result reports usually look like this : >>>> >>>>Octopus - 37.0/56 >>>>Fortress - 36.5 >>>>Devourer - 31.0 >>>>8555 - 29.5 >>>>Omega - 29.0 >>>>8777 - 29.0 >>>>Kiwi(Banks3) - 28.5 >>>>Deep CM - 28.0 >>>>Rudidio(KKND)- 27.5 >>>>Utzinger - 26.5 >>>>Titan - 26.5 >>>>Extra - 24.5 >>>>Chessmaster16- 24.0 >>>>El Rey - 21.5 >>>>Mg1 - 21.0 >>>> >>>>I can't draw any conclusions out of this result , can you ? >>>> >>>>The only trend I got so far is that a higher value for SS is better at longer >>>>time controls again. >>>> >>>>b.) Maybe CM6000 is worse than its results in the SSDF suggest - this might very >>>>well be the case : it played the minimum number of games necessary and it played >>>>_very_ few games against other top programs . >>>> >>>> >>>>CM8000 really scored bad against Fritz and partly Junior ; I am looking forward >>>>to a match against the Tigers - it seems to do quite OK against them in my >>>>basement, especially against Gambit Tiger . >>>> >>>>pete >>> >>>I'm sorry if you I read things wrongly, but I thought it was quite obvious to >>>daily readers of this forum. >>>There are countless examples, so don't say what I'm missing out when I just >>>quote one recent example, which is that CM8000 got a minus score against Junior >>>5, whereas CM6000 beat Junior 5, 2-0.[both are in official testings] >>> I could dig up much much more, if I spent some time over it. >>>S.Taylor >> >>You make all these statements yet your first post; >>http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?170600 >>in this thread indicates that you know nothing? >> >>Sarah. > >http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?170612 >Sarah, >whew! You do your homework very well! >I was probably refering to the above post (with a slightly different heading) >for what It's worth, and, if it is the right address. >I base myself mainly on inceasent reports posted here. But they are not always >written in a bad light e.g. It was always written about as a wonderful thing >that CM8000 was doing so well against an amateur program (I think anNon, or >whatever), also how good it was against Shredder 2, (in which there was even a >hardware advantage to Shredder?) And other such things which I read not so well >into it. And as I said, 6000 did MUCH MUCH better against Junior 5 than did >8000. You cannot base your assumption over 2 games v Junior5 - surely you know that that is ridiculous! Graham
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.