Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 04:39:20 01/25/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2006 at 05:48:28, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On January 24, 2006 at 23:54:43, Mike Byrne wrote: > >>On January 24, 2006 at 22:12:23, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>On January 24, 2006 at 22:09:27, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On January 24, 2006 at 21:45:06, Graham Banks wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 24, 2006 at 21:39:31, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 24, 2006 at 21:34:48, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>>>[snip] >>>>>>>The Old Siberian CHess wasnt bad either. But honestly isnt that a contradictio >>>>>>>in prosecco if you say strong _and_ ultra-tiny? Sounds as if you meant a >>>>>>>peabrain? How could it be strong? >>>>>> >>>>>>"I myself am often surprised at life's little quirks..." -- The man in black. >>>>>> >>>>>>Elo list from: >>>>>>http://wbec-ridderkerk.nl/ >>>>>> >>>>>>RankProgram: Ed 11 Comm Priv Ed 10 Ed 9 Ed 8 >>>>>> >>>>>>1 Fruit WCCC'05 2794* 2631 2610 2551 >>>>>>2 Shredder 9-x64 2766* 2818 2760 2766 >>>>>>3 Gandalf 6.01 2736* 2702 2738 2582 >>>>>>4 Pro Deo 1.1 2730 2689 2672 2724 >>>>>>5 Thinker 5.0b x64 2729 2590 2575 2617 >>>>>>6 Zappa 1.1 x64 2724 2668 New New >>>>>>[snip] >>>>>> >>>>>>The 5.0b version is not generally available (I understand he is working on an >>>>>>update now) but the version that I have is also very strong and is 70K in size. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The Thinker.exe file for Thinker 5.0b is 49kb in size! >>>> >>>>If we continue our extrapolation, it becomes infinitely smart at zero size. >>>>;-) >>> >>>Also it couldnt be engineered backwards... >>> >>>But you guys please tell me why isnt THinker promoted and supported like Rybka? >>>I dont get it. >> >>Simple - There is nothing else like Rybka -- it is - at the moment, the >>strongest engine per Ghz. >> >>The endefeated Rybka is the standard Beta 12, all others have tweaked settings. >> >>Many more rounds to play. >> >> Engine Score >>01: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 5.0/5 >>02: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 [001] 4.0/5 >>03: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 [111] 4.0/5 >>04: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 [010] 4.0/5 >>05: Pro Deo 4.0/5 >>06: Toga II 3.5/5 >>07: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 [011] 3.5/5 >>08: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 [110] 3.5/5 >>09: GFruit-4bx 3.0/5 >>10: Shredder 8 3.0/5 >>11: Fruit 2.1 3.0/5 >>11: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 msvtus6vp 3.0/5 >>13: Shredder Classic 1.3 3.0/5 >>14: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 [101] 3.0/5 >>15: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 [100] 3.0/5 >>16: Rybka v1.01 Beta 12.x64 MFB 2.5/5 >>17: Rybka v1.01 Beta 10d.x64 MFB 2.5/5 >>18: Shredder 9.1 2.0/5 >>18: Rybka v1.0 Preview 2 x64 2.0/5 >>20: Gandalf60 2.0/5 >>21: Crafty64 19.20 2.0/5 >>22: Rebel 12 1.5/5 >>23: Deep Sjeng 1.6 1.0/5 >>24: AnMon 5.50 0.5/5 >>25: Zappa 1.1 0.5/5 >>25: Ruffian 2.1 0.5/5 >>27: TheKing 3.23 0.5/5 >>28: SOS 5.1 for Arena 0.0/5 > > > >Mike, > >what you oversee is this: you could get the same results if you only had a >single Rybka entry and some 20 actually differently tuned Shredders!! This is >stats and NOT original strength. I used to give the example of the Bobby Fischer >problem in 1962 Curacao... You have no chance as a single player if some 6 or 8 >opponents can enter cooperation mode just by their mere number of players. I tell the Rybkas that they must STOP cooperating and breeding with each other! Thanks for pointing that out. ;>) ============================================================ Seriously , your point is well taken, but at this point I already know Rybka is the strongest -- now I just want to know which settings are best. Michael
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.