Author: Tanya Deborah
Date: 20:48:47 09/09/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2005 at 17:30:59, Peter Berger wrote: >On September 09, 2005 at 16:16:28, Peter Kappler wrote: Hi to all! I dont understand why people here are so surprised that Zappa won the Computer Chess Championship. Of course, Zappa 2.0 is a very strong program, much more than the first version(1.0 that it is free) but now, i think that the SSdf needs to test Zappa, to know exactly how strong is this program (in many long games matches) against the best programs. Speaking about the strengh of the programs, The SSDF results are much more real than any other tournament in the world (equal hardware + Much,much more games, etc). We have to wait and see if Zappa can play 400-500 games, and has a better performance than Shredder 9, also if Zappa can beat the strongest program Shredder 9 of the first place, to say that Zappa is the clear #1 in the world. Of course to win the World Chess Championship is a very great result for any programmer, and i want to congratulate his author for this amazing performance, but also I would hope that SSDF can test Zappa 2.0 against all the other programs for have a better result about the real strengh of this strong program. SSDF results are by far, much more realistic. Regards! Tanya Deborah >http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/archives/2005_computer_champ.htm >> >>Regarding Fritz's non-participation and Chessbase's failure to give the event >>any coverage on their website, Mig writes, "Basically they feel the publicity >>and scientific returns from comp-comp events have diminished to the point of >>negativity". > >I thought the comment by "PD" , who I assume to be following computerchess news >and events only occasionally, was interesting and thoughtful: > >"Fruit is heavily tested and is about the same strength as Shredder 9. It's >freeware. Equally strong is Turk II, which is also free. Spike beat Shredder 9 >at Chess690 recently, and it too is free to download. > >I don't know how its possible, but the good days are over for the Chessbase team >of programmers. Six months ago Shredder 9 was the gold standard for all computer >chess programmes. Its position was dominant. Neither Fritz nor Junior could keep >pace. Now these amature programes come from nowhere and outperform the Chessbase >stable. It goes without saying that all perform beyond human abilities, so >there's no question that chess engines have lost commercial value. They will >become part of other chess products, such as training cd's etc. > >Perhaps the challeng now is to write chess engines that improve human play. What >would that be like? >Posted by: pd at September 9, 2005 15:24 " > >-- > >When it is about Mig's report, he sounds like a loyal ChessBase employee to >defend them without them being attacked at all, kind of preemptive defense. > >I wonder when for the first time I will hear the significant amount of games >argument commenting on human championships btw. For unknown reasons humans need >much less games to find a valid champ ;) . > >At least Mig reports that Zappa is the champ, something you wouldn't be able to >conclude from recent CCC discussions :). > >Oh btw - I just went to the toilet and probably won't buy the Ktulu chessprogram >. I think both is of similar news value :) > >Cheers >Peter
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.