Author: Michael Cummings
Date: 01:34:04 12/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 15, 1999 at 03:21:36, Christophe Theron wrote: >On December 15, 1999 at 01:12:14, Michael Cummings wrote: > >>On December 14, 1999 at 13:47:58, ERIQ wrote: >> >>>I really don't think any other program has a chance not >>>even rebel-tiger. the combination of hardware and software is too strong. >>>but I'm sure those win box lovers would never give it a shot. >>> >>> sign, >>> Eriq >> >>Lets face facts, CM6K is the King, literally. >> >>If played on the same hardware as the other top programs, I (speculate) that it >>will be number 1. Some people think Chess tiger will be number 1 for many lists >>to come, > > >Not me. > > > >> once other programs learn how chess tiger plays then it will be like >>any other program that it will eventually be picked apart and start to lose. > > >Tiger will not lose its #1 because other programmers will "tune" against it. > >Tuning means nothing. If you try to tune for an opponent your end up with an >inferior program. You win against one, maybe, but suddenly you lose to the other >ones. > >I'm not even sure you can tune against a given opponent. > >Tiger will lose its #1 simply because other programmers are working seriously on >chess programming, not on tuning, and eventually one of them will come with a >stronger program. > >That is as simple as that. No need to invent "tuning". > > > > Christophe You said to me in an email you sent about learning, and how CM6K will lose out because it lacked it. So to will tiger, when the other program learn from playing tiger, which alot have not due to the lack of avaiability of your program. That is what I include in tuning an engine. Plus when more games are played against tiger programmers can tune their engines not just towards tiger but a bit towards all programs, an engine upgrade.
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.