Author: Djordje Vidanovic
Date: 04:07:10 02/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2004 at 02:31:10, Leo Dijksman wrote: >On February 27, 2004 at 17:25:15, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: > >>On February 27, 2004 at 15:19:39, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>Started a little contest at G/10 on AMD 950 MHz, so far this is the output: >>> >>> Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws >>> 1 List512 : 2629 296 207 8 68.8 % 2492 37.5 % >>> 2 Ruffian_105 : 2611 360 201 7 64.3 % 2509 42.9 % >>> 3 Rebel12_CB : 2601 378 251 7 57.1 % 2551 28.6 % >>> 4 Ruffian_210 : 2595 310 249 8 62.5 % 2506 25.0 % >>> 5 Ruffian_101 : 2568 310 387 8 62.5 % 2480 0.0 % >>> 6 Aristarch 4.41: 2541 325 292 8 56.2 % 2498 12.5 % >>> 7 Delfi-440 : 2523 325 292 8 56.2 % 2479 12.5 % >>> 8 Gothmog : 2500 251 378 7 42.9 % 2550 28.6 % >>> 9 Ruffian_202 : 2485 343 343 7 50.0 % 2485 14.3 % >>>10 Glc300 : 2466 343 343 7 50.0 % 2466 14.3 % >>>11 DeepSjeng : 2406 207 296 8 31.2 % 2543 37.5 % >>>12 Quark-232-net : 2399 249 310 8 37.5 % 2488 25.0 % >>>13 ELChinito 3.25: 2392 333 360 7 35.7 % 2494 14.3 % >>>14 Crafty-1910 : 2290 270 284 8 25.0 % 2481 25.0 % >>> >>>Initial indications are that all of the Ruffians are about the same strength. >>>But more data may change that appearance significantly. >> >> >>In case you wonder, I think that I might be of some help. You listed almost all >>the available versions up there, almost all but one: Ruffian Leiden 2003 BTW, >>the version that won the Dutch Open 2003. >>And that one is the strongest of all, at least in my testing: more than 5000 >>games at different although fast time controls (longest was G/45, played on two >>fast machines: P4-2.4 and Athlon 2800+ Tbred). >>Of course, I am aware of some other credible data (cf. Sarah Bird, for example) >>that point in a different direction. However, none of the testers has done so >>much testing with the Leiden version which is simply neglected for reasons >>unknown to me. Even the mammoth effort of Leo Dijksman, a person of absolute >>integrity, has somehow "missed" to test the Leiden version. Most probably due >>to the _unnecessary_ and very much _premature_ hype about Ruffian 2.0.0 (almost >>untested by me, at least). > > >Hi Dordje, > >It was not my decision to let v2.0.0 play here, it was Per-Ola's "own" decision >because he expected 2.0.0 beeing a bit stronger as the "Leiden" version! > >Best wishes, >Leo. Hi Leo, thanks for the reply. Unfortunately, Per-Ola made a mistake here. I remember having a conversation with you regarding what book to use for your tourney. I was not sure about it because I had not tested ver. 2.0.0 and had no exact idea how it would treat different opening patterns. Besides version 2.0.0 came too early then (you know it all too well, being one of the operators in Leiden), and appears to me to have come too late for Lokasoft now... But, let me repeat, time will tell. Wish you a nice weekend. Djordje
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.