Author: Joseph Ciarrochi
Date: 11:46:27 01/17/06
Go up one level in this thread
Yes, I always check time issues. At very short time controls (e.g., 2 min 1 sec), The original rybka beta seems to lose more on time than the later ones, (and in drawn positions!) . with 4 min 2 sec controls, time loses are extremely rare In the current set, beta10d lost once on time. It evaluated its position as losing at -3 (as did fritz9) so i let the result stand, though even if we assume it would have drawn, it would still only add a half point and does not change my central conclusions (i.e., that in this particular test, there were no significant differences) I have now shifted to the 40 move in 4 minute setting, repeating this time control (same as cegt blitz). This seems to totally eliminate time loses. best Joseph On January 17, 2006 at 08:24:38, George Sobala wrote: >On January 16, 2006 at 20:04:37, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: > >>I just finished some testing between the betas. It was 4 min with 2 sec >>increments on a decent pentium. Nooman test set. Default paremeters. All games >>were versus fritz9. There seems to be no significant differences, but it is >>critical to not infer too much, given n size is still small and this was against >>only one engine. >> >>best >>Joseph >> >> >> >>Rybka beta 1 58-42 >>Rybka 9b 59.5-40.5 >>rybka 10d 56 - 44 > >Have you sifted through the games to see how many games Rybjka 10d lost by >forfeiting on time?
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.