Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Crafty 1714 vs Ruffian 101 WOW

Author: Andreas Guettinger

Date: 05:16:55 10/03/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 02, 2002 at 23:54:16, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On October 02, 2002 at 18:35:06, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On October 02, 2002 at 16:22:44, Hartmut Woldeit wrote:
>>
>>>On October 02, 2002 at 14:07:59, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 02, 2002 at 13:02:08, Hartmut Woldeit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hallo,
>>>>>
>>>>>it's no new information that Crafty1714 is one of the best Crafty-versions.
>>>>>Better than most of his followers.
>>>>
>>>>I do not know it.
>>>>I only know that there is not big difference and you need hundreds of games to
>>>>prove.
>>>
>>>Hallo Uri,
>>>
>>>I do not know "hundred of games". I'm watching engine-engine-games.
>>
>>I did not watch games of Crafty versions but saying that Crafty17.14 is clearly
>>better than later crafty seems to me an insult to Bob who continue to work on
>>crafty.
>
>
>Note that I don't take it as an insult.  I've heard this (and other such
>things) more than once.  The problem is that it is very difficult to play
>two programs against each other and conclude which is best.  Often the
>result will be different than if each of the programs is played against a
>group of _other_ programs...
>
>I have played 17.x vs 18.15 and I noticed that it won more than it lost
>(the 17.14 version mentioned).  However, I then played them _both_ on ICC
>and noticed very little difference against other computers, with 18.x doing
>just a little bit better.  however, against humans, 18.x was significantly
>better, most likely the result of endgame knowledge that has been added...
>
>It is just another example of how hard it is to say X is better than Y beyond
>a shadow of a doubt.  If you only want to play X vs Y then it is not so hard
>to show that.  But if you want to compare X to Y in _other_ ways, it becomes
>much messier...


It's all the same discussion over and over again. Some people are just fixed on
the results of engine - engine matches. They don't care if e.g. there is not
much endgame knowledge necessary for such games, because the other engine
doesn't know anything about engines. The goal of a programmer should be the
performance against humans, not the performance in engine-engine games. I'm sure
that engines like Hiarcs or Crafty etc. are not weaker than the top shots
Tiger15 or Deep Fritz7 in engine-human games. Just because the programmers are
not interested as much in tuning their engines against other engines simply
doesn't mean they perform weaker against humans.

Andreas



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.