Author: greg moller
Date: 13:15:06 06/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 25, 1999 at 15:39:39, Will Singleton wrote: > >On June 25, 1999 at 15:20:30, greg moller wrote: > >>On June 25, 1999 at 13:50:16, Will Singleton wrote: >> >>> >>>On June 25, 1999 at 13:09:04, Lawrence S. Tamarkin wrote: >>> >>>>I thought a fictitious Harvard Cup would involve picking which humans & >>>>computer's would be in it, basing it on the setup that was traditionally used in >>>>past Harvard cup events. >>>> >>>>My picks would be, >>>> >>>>Human's: Playing programs: >>>> >>>>1. Benjamin 1.Shredder (of course) >>>> >>>>2. Rohde 2.Fritz5 >>>> >>>>3. Christiansen 3.Hiarcs7.32 >>>> >>>>4. Yermolinsky 4.Nimzo99 (or 2000) >>>> >>>>5. Fedorowicz 5.CM6000 (of of course) >>>> >>>>6. Gulko 6.CS Tal II for Windows (A real wild card) >>>> >>>> >>>>mrslug - the chess software addict! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>Re your choice of CSTal, my results indicate it's about as strong as my program, >>>perhaps a bit stronger. This is from ICC blitz play. What indication do you >>>have that it belongs anywhere near the top programs? >>> >>>Will >> >>In Thorsten's _slow_ tournaments Cstal has shown relative strength comparable to >>all the top programs. Of course, due to its provocative style there's no reason >>to think it won't do even better against humans. >> >>ICC blitz play is a poor indicator OTOH, IMO. :) >> >>regards, >>gm > >Probably. But then, how do you explain the fact that of the 4 CStal accounts on >ICC (that I know about), none of them has a high standard score? All of their >scores are less than their blitz scores, way less than top rated computers, and >either about the same as mine or less? (talmoves, master-tal, redbear, cstalx) > >Would also be nice to see the results of some independent testing, perhaps Shep >is doing so? > >Will All I can say is that "standard" games on ICC start at 15 min for the whole game and very rarely go over 1 hour/game. So basically all you get is something similar to "action" chess, and by no means the serious 40/2 hours stuff. CStal, being the slowest searcher, benefits the most from the slower/longer time controls. Another thing I've noticed about the CStal accounts on ICC is that very few are faster than PII300 hardware-wise, so that's another disadavantage, considering the hardware speed of the top rated programs there. To draw proper conclusions, we definitely need more proper testing IMO. regards, gm
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.