Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 18:56:56 09/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 1999 at 19:21:48, Ratko V Tomic wrote: > > This is precisely why the SSDF insists that people quote its > > information in its entirety (that is, including hardware used, > > games played, average rating of opponents, and percentile score.) > >Well, one would need lawyers to get that right. A 24 Pt bold headline >may shout "Fritz at the top," while a 6 Pt footnote whispers the rest >of the story. Should SSDF require the font size and boldness, too? If >they picked 10 top programs (incl. e.g. Rebel 10, Hiarcs 7, not just 7.32 >from CB) and distributed time on the fastest machines equally, you still >get the same overall info on the strength improvement on that hardware, >just covering the wider spectrum of programs, but playing the same total >number of games on the fast hardware. Nothing useful is gained by giving >all the fast hardware to the 4 CB programs, in effect deciding before the >cycle even started who will get the top 4 spots. My point is they won't publish entries unless 100 games have been played. So maybe they could have played 60 games with 10 programs on 450s, and we wouldn't know squat about how much improvement to expect until the next list, because no 450 results would have been published this time around. Dave
This page took 0.01 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.