Author: Steve Glanzfeld
Date: 04:29:55 07/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2005 at 05:33:39, Andrew Williams wrote:
>I think that you want to "replace" SSDF, you need to at least reach the point
>where people have heard of you! SSDF is very well respected. CEGT is just
>another rating list, as far as I can see. That's not to denigrate the work that
>is being done by the CEGT team, but you shouldn't go around talking about
>"replacing" SSDF until you've earned a lot more respect in the community. All
>IMHO of course.
I am not a member of the AEGT/CEGT team, but I think it's the better rating info
source. SSDF was great, useful, informative, even indispensable at times (10+
years ago). It is great when long ponder matches can be played, but is it
representative for the typical user's configuration, or for analysis (= primary
use of engines!)?
February 2005: release of Shredder 9
July 2005: no Shredder 9 in a public SSDF list yet
(there were more examples like this, Chessmaster..)
You will have heard of Fruit 2.1. It currently is the 2nd strongest engine. 2.0
was very strong already, too. Imagine SSDF would be your only info source about
engine strength. Oops. Never heard of this.
Steve
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.