Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:04:57 10/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 02, 2002 at 17:33:39, Mark Young wrote: >On October 02, 2002 at 15:39:34, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On October 02, 2002 at 10:00:45, Paul Doire wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>5 Quick 4 minute games (for what they are worth) >> >>Therein lies the rub. Similar results were had with GLC, but it turns out that >>GLC (too) is being run over rough-shod, like everyone else. >> >>>P3 450Mhz, crafty 24mb ram, ruffian 32mb ram, 128MB system, Win 98 >>>3,4 and some 5 man TB's, own books played under Winboard 4.2.6 >>> >>>Crafty_1714 vs Ruffian_101 +3-0=2 >> >>5 games have little meaning. >> >>>Does older Crafty have Ruffians number?, >> >>I doubt it. Unless you are running Crafty on a 4 CPU box. ;-) >> >>>Anyone else tried this yet? >> >>Here is a ten game match at G/60 between two titans: >> >> Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws >> 1 Ruffian 1.0.1 : 2554 244 142 10 65.0 % 2446 50.0 % >> 2 Crafty-19.0 : 2446 142 244 10 35.0 % 2554 50.0 % >> >>[games to follow] >> >>Ten games are also totally unconvincing. However, I think we can see from the >>pure volume of games that have been trundled under Ruffian's hooves that Ruffian >>is a force to be dealt with. > >What force. I must have been getting bogus copies of Ruffian. It is good, but I >would not call it a force... The more I test Ruffian and at longer time >controls the worse Ruffian scores. > >Here is my current test..still running. > >My Crafty has been out scoring Ruffian in almost all my tests. > >P4 2.8 Ghz 1 GB Ram. > >Tiger book used for all programs. > >Each program has its own copy of the tiger book. Book learning is carried over >for each test. > >Blitz:15'+15" 0 > > 1 2 3 4 5 6 >1 Hiarcs 7.32 ** 1 00 11 1 1 5.0/7 >2 Deep Fritz 7 0 ** ½½ ½ ½1 1 4.0/7 >3 Chess Tiger 14.0 11 ½½ ** 0 0 ½ 3.5/7 15.00 >4 Junior 6.0 00 ½ 1 ** 1 ½½ 3.5/7 10.50 >5 Crafty 18.15 0 ½0 1 0 ** 1½ 3.0/7 >6 Ruffian 1.0.1 0 0 ½ ½½ 0½ ** 2.0/7 Your results seem to be very atypical from what others achieve. However, with only 7 Ruffian games, this particular result certainly can't be called surprising. I suspect you may have the hash (and possibly the EGTB) set up wrong. Or perhaps your tests are using Ruffian as a UCI engine instead of as a Winboard engine, where [as UCI] the results do not seem to come out as well. Ruffian seems to be scoring as well or better than most professional engines in all the tests that I have seen. It has a + score against ChessMaster 8000 and Chess Tiger 14 on my hardware. The only engine I have seen give Ruffian a negative score is Chess Tiger 15. But (of course) the results are preliminary. Perhaps we will learn more over time.
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.