Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 11:20:20 02/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2003 at 09:04:27, Albert Silver wrote: >Understandably people want some kind of reference and ratings of any kind are >usually what is given. 10-15 years ago, it was done via games played against >players, but then again, there were far fewer machines, and they were quite >beatable. Nowadays things are different so the comp-comp rating lists of the >SSDF have become the norm. It is not at all surprising that they have become the >benchmark nor that the results are used for marketing purposes, but that has >nothing to do with the SSDF in itself. There may have been some controversy in >the past such as the memory rich machines to accomodate Fritz 5's inclusion, >however the machines used aren't unusual by any common standards and do give a >good feel for what to expect on said hardware. I see no reason to question their >results or methodology. Things such as the error margin can be read on every >single line, and it isn't hidden like fine print in some obscure paragraph at >the end. If one feels Chessbase's use of the SSDF to promote a program distorts >the truth about it, don't blame the SSDF, blame Chessbase. As to it's >non-inclusion of Fritz 8 so far, yes, it is very likely a commercial move, but >if someone were to buy 6-8 copies of Frtiz 8 and send it to them, I believe they >would start testing it. If they refused, THEN one would be quite correct to >question the SSDF's independence. The SSDF is dependent on the copies supplied by the software distributers. It seems unrealistic to expect them to purchase several copies of each program, nor is the scenario involving a benevolent contributor credible. Since Chessbase is the only major player on the market at least in terms of different top class programs, it would be silly not to exploit that situation, eg. by launching each new version at reasonable intervals. Preferably with a strength sufficient to be ranked among the very best. Everytime that isn't the case, a program is witheld or an update supplied as quickly as possible. A scenario that has benefitted Fritz several times in the last few years. Whether it results in a continuous demand or an increased number of copies sold is another question. Is the ranking relevant for the majority or is a question of collecting almost anything released? The latter is the case in this forum, but it may not apply to the rational outside world, which then makes it a worthwhile policy. I think the SSDF should demand copies within a certain period of time after the release or otherwise refuse to test the program. It might even be a good idea to have an update policy. Regards, Mogens
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.