Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: but hey , don't take my word for it...

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 04:31:25 01/20/06

Go up one level in this thread


On January 20, 2006 at 07:27:48, Thomas Lagershausen wrote:

>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


If I quote part of a rating list, what did I interprete at all? Please try to
behave. And tell the other friends, what i told you. In case they want to say
the same you did.



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.