Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 14:14:09 12/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 1999 at 05:42:55, Ed Schröder wrote: >>Subject: Re: SSDF ratings are 100% accurate > >>Posted by John Warfield on December 12, 1999 at 20:36:17: > >>>>Now I am beginning to see that SSDF ratings do not reflect performance against >>>>humans period. Going back to my example, program B could actually be weaker >>>>than program A against GMs, even though it is 50 points stronger in SSDF comp >>>>vs. com testing. >>>> >>>>I guess this is what Ed Schroder has been saying all along about Rebel. I >>>>need to think about this for a while. >>> >>>The MAIN difference I noticed: in comp-comp both programs (in many cases) >>>can afford (multiple) small to big positional mistakes. Try this against >>>a GM, one little mistake and you lose. The REBEL-HOFFMAN game was a >>>perfect example of this. >>> >>>Ed >> >> >> The rebel hoffman game was lost because rebel crashed remember? > >Of course I remember. But in the meantime I have changed my mind. Rebel due >to the hardware problems used about 50-60% of its time also 2 horrible moves >were played (one with a +2.xx) score that couldn't be reproduced. This made me >decide the game was worthless. > >But after going through the game again and again my conclusion is different now. >Rebel didn't understand the opening, played a few inferior moves and technically >the game was over after move 18. Note that Rebel was in book till move 15! > >I think that's all there is to say about this game. The hardware problems came >after the 2 inferior moves (16.Qc1 and 18.a4) and GM Hoffman did not let Rebel >go. In comp-comp however you still would have good chances to win the game >(note that after 18.a4 Rebel is still a pawn up) as the opening was very >strategic by nature an area computers are still weak. > >Just try any chess program that gives you a positive score for black after 18.a4 >and if it does buy it by all means :-) > >Or take 2 (or more) good chess programs and let them continue after 18.a4 and >I am pretty sure white's total game score will be over 50%. > >This is what I got as a comment from GM Hoffman about the game: > >[ begin ] > >I think it was a very interesting game for black,with 15... Rb7 an interesting >novelty.16. Qc1 means that Rebel doesn't understand the position (16.Rc1 >was normal plan). > >I think it is very hard to a computer to know the difference between to have >material plus and the strategical compensation for the pawn. That's because >I choice the Volga Gambit. That you must think how to improve for a high level >program. > >[ end ] > >Rebel was caught on a weak point of its opening book. Very clever and an >instructive experience. > >Ed Perhaps this will convince Enrique to include Rebel-Hoffman as a loss for Rebel in his statistics gathering. What did Baburin think of Rebel's play? (I took a quick look on your site for his comments but didn't find them.) Dave
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.