Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:47:19 10/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 28, 1999 at 13:49:18, Tony Hedlund wrote: >On October 28, 1999 at 09:31:22, Harald Faber wrote: > >>On October 28, 1999 at 08:44:50, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >> >>>>I don't until there is proof. >>>>A) CM wasn't tested on P90 so there is no comparison and no evidence that Tiger >>>>is also best on MMX200 or K6-450 as Rebel9 was best on P90 before but wasn't on >>>>MMX200. So to conclude from the P90 result that Tiger will also be best on >>>>faster machines is too early and probably wrong. >>>>B) I don't like all that Tiger-hype since most of the games and results are not >>>>tournament games. >>> >>>?Hype? is propaganda based on smoke and this is not what I am doing. We have >>>quite outstanding results coming from several sources. Some results at 40/2, >>>some at 60/30, and so far all seem to indicate that Tiger is the strongest in >>>comp-comp. Results are facts, no hype. You may or may not like them, but your >>>choice of the word ?hype? is most unfortunate. >> >>You can bury me for the choice of that word if you want to, I don't mind. :-) >> >>Show me the tournament results. How many, who played them on which hardware >>(2PCs?)? >> >>>>Concerning TIger/K6-450 vs Prog X/P90 I think it is really nonsense to play such >>>>a match, no matter if Prog X has an almost safe rating. >>>>Take a class-a soccer team, let's call it team A, playing versus a team of the >>>>lowest regional class (call it Z). Team A wins 10-0. Let another team out of the >>>>class-a play against Z, call it team B. B wins 12-0. Would you say that team B >>>>is better/stronger than team A? I would never say that until I have more results >>>>and games within class-a. And you shouldn't say that too. >>> >>>SSDF people explained this very many times already. They might do it again in >>>this thread. >>> >>>Enrique >> >>I know and I was referring to that most significant argument. If a member >>doesn't have 2 K6-450 or 1xK6-450+1xMMX200 but only K6-450+P90, better leave >>playing programs against each other on these 2 machines. > >As Enrique wrote, we have explained this so many times before it's sad to go >down that road again. > >It doesn't matter which ELO the opponents to a new entrance have. We can play >200 Tiger 12 AMD K6-2 450 games against P90-programs, or we can play 200 games >against AMD K6-2 450 programs. We will get approx. the same ELO. It's in the >system made by Arpad Elo. > >Tony Have you checked this with any statistical measures? I typically find that given two otherwise equal programs, one advantage of some sort (faster machine, bigger hash, better book, etc) tends to exaggerate the rating produced by the Elo system. One example is doubling the cpu speed seems to make a program some 70 points stronger in computer vs computer, but it does _not_ have that effect in computer vs human games... In other words, the Elo can be somewhat skewed without it being intentional.
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.