Author: Vasik Rajlich
Date: 10:17:56 01/15/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2006 at 09:06:14, Roger D Davis wrote: >On January 15, 2006 at 08:46:47, Albert Silver wrote: > >>On January 15, 2006 at 07:37:55, Roger D Davis wrote: >> >>>On January 14, 2006 at 20:09:05, Albert Silver wrote: >>> >>>>On January 14, 2006 at 18:00:22, Roger D Davis wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 14, 2006 at 17:15:39, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi folks, >>>>>> >>>>>>I am just wondering how much improvement vasik has managed from the original >>>>>>beta and the newest beta (please post anything you have). My initial tests >>>>>>against fritz 9 show (4 min 2 sec increment); noomen openings): >>>>>> >>>>>>rybka beta 10 37 - 22 >>>>>>rybka beta 35.5 - 23.5 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>(this tourni still going, will post final results soon.) >>>>>> >>>>>>My guess is vasik has maybe improved rybka by 30 points (please present any data >>>>>>you have since this is truley guessing.) >>>>>> >>>>>>I am not sure that adding endgame knowledge will lead to big improvement. Maybe >>>>>>a half point here or there, but i could be wrong. Maybe 20 point boost? >>>>>> >>>>>>Let's say the February release of rybka gets a total of 50 points improvement. >>>>>>This will give it about a 90 point advantage over fruit, based on the CEGT. If >>>>>>fabien keeps improving fruit as he has in the past (see >>>>>>http://www.fruitchess.com/playing-strength.htm), then fruit could very well >>>>>>catch rybka in the next release. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I really like the way Fruit 2.2. plays. It offers you very solid advice and >>>>>>seems to understand opening play quite well (will post data on this soon). In >>>>>>playing style, it seems very different from rybka and thus forms a nice >>>>>>complement to this monster fish. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>best >>>>>>Joseph >>>>>> >>>>>>ps. did fabien ever offer an explanation about why on earth he called his >>>>>>program fruit. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Fruit versus Rybka could turn out to be a one of those classic sports rivalries >>>>>(yes, chess programming is a sport), because it pits different kinds of >>>>>expertise against each other. Rybka's author is obviously a great programmer and >>>>>chess IM, but Fruit's author may be the best chess coder alive. >>>> >>>>I'm absolutely not putting down Fabien's skills by one iota, but it is strange >>>>to see someone say that when a superior program, even if possibly temporarily, >>>>exists. How do you explain this program's superiority and still claim Fabien is >>>>better? What part of Rybka is so much stronger that it overcomes worse coding? >>>> >>>> Albert >>>> >>>>> >>> >>>Obviously, they're both great coders. I don't KNOW that it will develop into a >>>great rivalry. Maybe and maybe not. >>> >>>If I remember correctly, Donninger reviewed one of the Rybka betas in a previous >>>thread and stated that the code wasn't particularly well optimized. >> >>I remember the post, but you have forgotten a very important element. He then >>suggested that with money Vasik would be able to afford a better compiler. The >>problem was with the compiling and not Vasik's coding. >> >> Albert >> > >Then I stand corrected about the Donninger post. However, it's still true that >Fabien's code caused quite a stir. Of course, it's also true that Vasik has been >through the Fruit code forwards and backwards, because he said so. Perhaps he's >emulating Fabien's style, which would reduce any difference. > >Roger Fabien has a very clear, textbook coding style - a sort of Capablance of chess coding. It's not surprising that Fruit was open source for a while, it's the sort of code that simply has to be shown :) Vas
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.