Author: Thomas Lagershausen
Date: 04:27:48 01/20/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2006 at 07:00:07, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On January 20, 2006 at 06:42:42, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On January 20, 2006 at 06:32:48, Günther Simon wrote: >> >>>On January 20, 2006 at 06:04:57, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On January 20, 2006 at 05:51:32, Martin Andersen2 wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 20, 2006 at 05:28:47, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>I question that Rybka is already proven the strongest engine today. Then people >>>>>>tell me to look at CEGT where that has been proven... This was a few days ago >>>>>>here in CCC. I must object to such sort of hybris. The truth is that we dont >>>>>>have statistical methods for making such claims. Even after 700 or maybe over >>>>>>1000 games the significance is not so sure and if you look at the +/- boundaries >>>>>>of the so called Elo results then you still have overlappings and you cant say >>>>>>that Rybka is the clear first. >>>>> >>>>>Rybka 1.0 beta 64 bit 2859 +-21 >>>>>Deep shredder 9 2CPU 2804 +-17 >>>>> >>>>>So Rybka's number 1 spot cannot be touched. You are wrong. >>>>> >>>>>Martin. >>>> >>>> >>>>1 Rybka 1.01 Beta 9 64-bit opt 2921 73 68 71 80.3 % 2677 33.8 % >>>>2 Rybka 1.0 Beta 64-bit 2859 21 21 765 68.4 % 2725 32.7 % >>>>3 Deep Shredder 9.12 x64 2CPU 2844 45 45 168 64.6 % 2740 30.4 % >>> >>> >>>Also apples and oranges... You show 1CPU vs. 2CPUs >>>scroll a bit down to find an appropriate Shredder for real comparison >>> >>>...snip babbling... >> >> >>Please just try to behave. Otherwise you wont last very long here in CCC. In the >>meantime look also here into the ratings of Kurt Utzinger: >> >>1 Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit 2620 20 25 700 67.0 2497 30.0 % >>2 Toga II 1.1 2595 23 24 600 61.8 2512 33.3 % >>3 Fruit 2.2.1 2591 18 20 1010 62.8 2500 29.2 % >>4 Fritz 9 2589 19 21 880 62.2 2503 28.0 % >> >> >>Also here you can see the same. Of course Rybka is leading (probably for the >>given reasons of its daily updates) but the differences are NOT significant. It >>is all about the power of stats and NOT my personal beliefs or my prejudices, as >>you want to propagate. Next time you repeat such nonsense I'll contact the mod. > > >Here is the head of Gerhard Sonnabend Rating List: > >1 Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit 2827 29 44 304 71.9 % 2664 26.6 % > 2 Deep Shredder 9 UCI(t2) 2806 20 33 612 71.9 % 2643 22.9 >% > 3 Hiarcs 10 2780 39 41 208 63.7 % 2682 33.2 >% > 4 Fruit 2.2 2778 23 31 520 67.3 % 2653 26.5 >% > 5 Shredder 8(t2) 2767 27 35 398 67.0 % 2644 26.4 >% > > >The same almost. Here it's overlapping down to number five Shredder 8. We had >this debate over all the last years with SSDF. These differences are NOT >significant insofar we wanted to claim a clear superiority of one single engine. >With all that I dont deny that Rybka is a gigantic enjoyment for all of us. But >let's wait a little bit until other programmers have reacted with their >updates... You are not able to interprete such lists because you didn´t know what t2 means. The same as above, where is Rybka 64bit in this list and where are the improved 32bit versions of Rybka in this list? Please stop your campaigne of desinformation. TL
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.