Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 02:53:53 11/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 2002 at 05:36:08, Sune Fischer wrote: >Well, as you know there is relation between speed and time, slower machines >would need more time. How are you going to test this way? Time handicaps don't work with pondering. >If we had enough games, this would smooth out and we would get nice average >rating performances. It's not like those lists are done with laser precision >anyway (statistical noise being a factor and all). You'll have to try to minimise the noise if you want to draw any conclusion from your list except 'Deep Fritz 7 is better than TSCP' >>Playing hundreds of games at the time control the SSDF >>uses takes an incredible amount of computer time. > >Yes, Rome wasn't build in a day, but we have lots of people doing tournaments, >it's just a matter of coordinating the results. Most of the results that are posted here are pure garbage, if you merge those you'll just end up with more garbage. -- GCP
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.