Author: Arturo Ochoa
Date: 09:01:47 02/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2005 at 10:59:27, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 18, 2005 at 10:30:42, Arturo Ochoa wrote: > >>On February 18, 2005 at 04:50:13, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On February 18, 2005 at 04:25:37, Sune Fischer wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>>>These so called "killer books" are always used by very strong engines on top >>>>>>hardware. >>>>>>The killer books seem to work best against weaker engines on weaker hardware. >>>>>>Now isn't that odd? :) >>>>> >>>>>Killer books are in most of the cases for rich people who can pay for book >>>>>makers so it is not a surprise that they work against engines with weaker >>>>>hardware that do not have time to prepare. >>>> >>>>That could be the reason, but the point is that it won't show a lot because >>>>these engines are so strong already that they would have won even with a bad >>>>book. >>>> >>>>It would be far more interesting to give Beowulf a 700 Elo book and then go >>>>wipeout Shredder & co in the big tournaments. :) >>>> >>>>>I also do not beliebe in 700 elo but I certainly believe that they can improve >>>>>the performance by 100-200 elo in a tournament when part of the opponents. >>>>> >>>>>If you have statistics of a lot of games that you get 70% against some program >>>>>with line A and 50% against the same program with line B then choosing line A is >>>>>important. >>>>> >>>>>If you have similar statistics for many programs then it may give you >>>>>significant increase in performance in tournaments. >>>> >>>>I tend to think the effect is mostly psychological. >>>> >>>>I can see how comming out of book with a +0.6 score against an equal opponent >>>>must feel like half a victory, and it's not hard for me to imagine that some >>>>would call that totally winning :) >>> >>>I am not talking about score but about statistics >>> >>>It is possible to test engine A against engine B in many openings. >>> >>>If opening X leads to 50% and opening Y leads to 70% then opening X is better >>>against engine B(it does not mean that it is better generally against >>>everything). >>>> >>>>>Even with no special preperation against specific opponent you may have >>>>>statistics that your program score 60% with 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 and only 50% >>>>>against the same opponents with 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 so of course opening >>>>>preperation can help significantly in tournament. >>>> >>>>I believe such is thing is possible, but increasing your score from 50% to 60% >>>>is still not much more than 50-100 Elo. >>>> >>>>-S. >>> >>>I agree so I do not think general preperation can give you more than 50-100 elo >>>preperation against specific opponents can give you another 50-100 elo so the >>>general improvement in tournaments can be 100-200 elo. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Again the question: how do you know that? Have you ever run any test that holds >>your suppositions? If you tune very well a book against a specific opponent and >>your opponent is similar in strength and you get the 90% of the score. What is >>the elo of your engine against this engine? Only 100-200 elo. >> >>Provide facts...... > >The problem is that there are engines that you cannot prepare against them. >If the specific opponent is static you are right but considering the fact that >part of the opponents are not static target and even if they did not work about >the book they worked about the engine my guess is only 100-200 elo > >Uri You got my point: It is just a supposition and you dont have proofs to support that. You generalize without giving examples of your suppositions. Is this apply to all the engines? Did you run a test will alll the engines to prove your point? Your supposition suck when you try to asseverate it as an absolute generalization. In this case, the asseveration is again: False assumption. :)
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.