Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:16:25 10/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 21, 2002 at 14:36:00, Peter Berger wrote: >On October 21, 2002 at 14:31:46, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 21, 2002 at 14:28:23, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>On October 21, 2002 at 12:15:23, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>> >>>>a) >>>>since at SSDF they are testing at 120'/40 [many thanks for this great work] but >>>>95% of all users are (only) playing blitz games >>>> >>>An interesting statement. I wonder if it is true that 95% of the users prefer >>>blitz games, wouldn't it be more useful if the SSDF tested the programs at a >>>faster time control? Although it is true that slow time controls improve the >>>quality of the games, it might be a bad idea to test at time controls only a >>>tiny group of people use. >> >> >>I think that a lot of users are interested in slow time >>control and they may not use computers for comp-comp games. >> >>I believe that the correspondence players are interested in the >>program that is best in slow time control. >> >>They do not use programs for comp-comp tournament but for analyzing >>their games. >> >>Uri > >I agree - but for this group the SSDF results might be of little interest, too, >because they are much too fast. > >Here results in complicated testsuites for long time searches might be much more >interesting. Test suites are not a good substitute for games. I believe that the best estimate that we can get for the ability of programs at long time control is the ssdf list. Uri
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.