Author: James T. Walker
Date: 08:29:17 11/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 1999 at 13:34:42, Dann Corbit wrote: >On November 19, 1999 at 10:16:00, Randy Schmidt wrote: >>On November 19, 1999 at 07:03:59, Jouni Uski wrote: >> >>>On November 19, 1999 at 06:48:03, odell hall wrote: >>> >>>>On November 19, 1999 at 04:08:22, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>> >>>>>From SSDF: >>>>> >>>>>1½01110011½1½111111111111½1½½10½11½11111 32.0/40 Tiger 12 amd-450 >>>>>0½10001100½0½000000000000½0½½01½00½00000 8.0/40 Nimzo 99 200mmx >>>>> >>>>>12 wins in row against 2567 program! I wonder if Garry Kasparov can repeat this? >>>>>Actually I can bet $100 that he can't. >>>>> >>>>>Jouni >>>> >>>> >>>> Are you saying Tiger won 12 straight games one on top of the other? or do you >>>>mean twelve games with draws in between? If you mean the latter, I think that >>>>Kaspy could match this quite easily, especially if the program is running on a >>>>pent 200 and time control is 40/2. >>> >>>As You see it won 12 games straight and with changing colors (WBWBWB..)! >>> >>>Jouni >> >>Please note that tiger gets a V-12 engine with turbo boost and Nimzo has a >>4-cylinder engine with diluted fuel. >Of course. Since the hardware was published, that is clear. However, the >opponent has a known and very good rating. Just pretend that Nimzo isn't Nimzo, >but rather a chess player who lives in a black box named Wally (the box is named >Wally, the player is anonymous). Anyway, this player has an ELO of 2572 in his >club of very good players!!! Now, Wally plays against C.T. and gets his ever >loving butt kicked. Are you impressed now? I know I am. > >>Show us this on equal machines :) >Better yet, reverse the machines and try again. I'll suspect Chess Tiger may >win on the P200 (but it will be a lot closer). In order for a really >significant statistical test, hundreds of games should be played. > >One thing is clear, Tiger has teeth, claws, and knows how to use them. > >Proposal to those who don't like unequal hardware: >Pretend that it is not a computer opponent at all but a faceless guy who is a >great tactician but not such a great strategist; who has a high ELO and will >play for hours on end. He's kind of boring and won't talk about anything >interesting. All he does is play all day. He doesn't get his feelings hurt >when he loses and does not get excited when he wins. So his feelings don't get >hurt. > >But don't think that way about Chess Tiger. I think she's a girl. So pretend >it's a lady in the box. Am I right C. T.? Hello Dann, Actually your analogy is good. If you consider that program (A) is just a chess player with a 2567 rating and along comes another chess player (B)which beats it 80% of the time then you can deduce that chess player(B) is 240 points stronger than Chess player A. It does not matter the speed of their engines or the weight of their brains. A winning percentage of 80% is an ass kicking. This is yet another over simplification brought to you by my being retired with nothing else to do. Jim Walker
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.