Author: Mike S.
Date: 14:26:47 10/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2002 at 16:58:46, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On October 09, 2002 at 15:36:13, Mike S. wrote: >>(...) >>Percentages, based on a large comp-comp database: >> >>Engine | #Games total W B | total eQE* W/eQE B/eQE >>------------------------------------------------------------------- >>Fritz 7 | 784 69% 72% 65% | 59% (#57) 53% 67% >>Chess Tiger 14 | 850 66% 71% 62% | 72% (#71) 73% 71% >>Shredder 6/-P. | 743 61% 65% 57% | 58% (#58) 63% 53% >>Junior 7 | 799 55% 58% 53% | 41% (#60) 25% ! 56% >>Crafty 18.x | 741 48% 48% 47% | 51% (#52) 51% 52% >> >>*) "eQE" = early queen exchange (within the first 10 moves) >(...) >Like I indicated in my other post, you can't really draw any reasonable >conclusions from these statistics. Too many variables are unaccounted for. The figures *themselves* are the information (and don't require interpretations/assumptions at first). IOW, factual like: Junior 7 scored 55% in that databse in total, and 41% when queens were exchanged early. So unless somebody finds another large game collection which gives much different figures, I draw the conclusion that Junior 7 achieves a much worse score without queens, at least with white (58%/25%). Isn't that reasonable? But of course the next thing you think about is: What *could* be the reason? There are i.e. testsuite results which indicate that Tiger 14 and Crafty 18 indeed are relatively better in the endgame, compared to their other strengths, and for Junior 7 vice versa. Regards, M.Scheidl
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.