Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 14:48:18 04/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2004 at 17:04:18, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >On April 30, 2004 at 10:51:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 30, 2004 at 09:25:57, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>>If Falcon cannot use parallel hardware then it is not bob's fault. >>> >>>I never tested Falcon versus Crafty on unequal hardware. All my tests and my >>>conclusions are purely based on tests conducted on equal hardware, using one >>>processor, and same book. >>> >>>In my post in this thread >>>(http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362197) I only mentioned the >>>name "Crafty" in the following paragraph: >>> >>>"Crafty is a great engine, and it is free. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't >>>be interested in other grandmaster-strength programs." >>> >>>And added that Shredder is stronger than other engines. If someone read that >>>differently and jumped to interesting conclusions, it is surely not my problem. >> >> >>Actually it is. You _specifically_ said that only Shredder is capable of >>beating your program. That _specifically_ suggests that no other commercial >>engine can do so. >> >>That was what I responded to... I didn't bring Crafty into the discussion. >>Vincent did that in his usual "change the subject" form of discussion... > > >Hmm , he mentioned that his program gets consistently beaten for > 50% only by >shredder. >That does not imply that for all other engines , falcon beats them > 50% >For strong engines with decent timecontrols and an ok book (with not many sharp >lines) - most games would end in draws. >So I dont see anything per se wrong in his statement. >Even if fritz cannot beat his program > 50% , it does not imply that fritz is >weaker than falcon , the score could be 35% fritz wins , 15% falcon wins and 50% >draws ! > >So is it possible that it is you who might have jumped into conclusions ?? > >Mridul This is getting ridiculous. What Omid was saying was that, in his own testing, Shredder clearly outperforms his program, while other programs don't. It's quite simple, really -- I don't understand why there's a page-long thread about it. One can choose to question his testing methods and/or conditions, but the statement itself was reasonably straightforward. Dave
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.