Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 02:21:24 05/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 2002 at 04:29:10, Uri Blass wrote:
>On May 25, 2002 at 02:11:21, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>
>>On May 24, 2002 at 18:19:58, James T. Walker wrote:
>>
>>>On May 24, 2002 at 17:27:58, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 24, 2002 at 16:12:25, pavel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On May 24, 2002 at 15:39:27, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On May 24, 2002 at 13:34:17, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Dear Kurt,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>it is true that he did not play enough games, but I did and I told that the
>>>>>>Classic version is stronger.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"UNFORTUNATELY SSDF FINDS TIME TO TEST SEVERAL TIGER VERSION AND NOT THE WC
>>>>>>PROGRAM-:((("
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I sincerely did not understood this yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Recently they stated that it is not clear which book is better, but they only
>>>>>>tested the classic with the slower K2-450.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This to me SOUND ONLY AS AN EXCUSE...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sorry to criticize SSDF, but I cannot lie or tell what I do not think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>SSDF can you hear me?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ciao
>>>>>>Sandro
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hey Sandro,
>>>>> According to Stephan Shredder7 (which will come later this year) will
>>>>>be reasonably stronger over Shredder6, are you testing it?
>>>>
>>>>Of course, but the final version is not ready yet. We are still working on it.
>>>>
>>>>>If so, whats your first impression?
>>>>
>>>>Well, you will see the difference in a few games...
>>>>
>>>>Do you understand what I mean?
>>>>
>>>>Maybe this time we'll be lucky to see it tested in due time by SSDF:-))
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>regards
>>>>>pavs
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>>Sandro
>>>
>>>When I started testing the Shredder Classic and Shredder C.B. I had no idea
>>>about who wrote what book and which is stronger. My opinion is now based on my
>>>results at G/5, G/30, G/60 & G/120 games. I believe your book is better than
>>>the CB book simply because of the results. If the engines are really identical
>>>then that is the only logical reason for Shredder 6 Classic to be doing better
>>>in my test. In fact at the moment (subject to change) Shredder 6 Classic is 4
>>>Elo points higher than Fritz 7 in my Standard database after only 133 games. I
>>>still think Fritz 7 will end up on top but Shredder 6 Classic has been a very
>>>nice surprise.
>>>Jim
>>
>>Hi Jim,
>>
>>yes the engine is the same and the only difference between the 2 is the opening
>>book. I am the author of the book for the classic version.
>>
>>Why should have we used my book in all tournaments starting from year 2000 if
>>not scoring better?
>>
>>We won all tournaments we entered except last year WCCC where we got 3rd place,
>>but first with single processor hardware.
>>
>>So, SSDF finds time to test several version of other programs, but not to test
>>our strongest version. Maybe we could have got 1rst place. So at the end we have
>>been damaged.
>>This is a fact!
>>
>>I do not like to criticize SSDF because I know they do an important job in this
>>field and I do appreciate this, but in my opinion THIS IS A SCANDAL!
>>
>>Why people do not say anything about this.
>>Pls. tell SSDF we do not agree with this.
>>
>>
>>Sandro
>
>I believe that the ssdf should test only what the programmer asks them to test.
>If the programmer say nothing and the program is comercial with 2 different book
>they can use the book that they want.
Well, Stefan did ask to test the UCI version, but there was some delay, so this
may is not a SSDF fault (to be honest).
>
>I do not know if stefan asked the ssdf to test Shredder6 classic on Athlon1200
>on time(before they start testing).
Later on we did clarify this point, but they went on testing the CB version.
Now they put this QUITE PROVOCATIVE STATEMENT, so I simply could not stay
silent.
>
>Uri
Sandro
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.