Author: Albert Silver
Date: 05:17:03 02/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2000 at 19:18:06, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>On February 01, 2000 at 11:57:56, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On February 01, 2000 at 11:06:30, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>>
>>>On February 01, 2000 at 00:43:26, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>What do you say about Fritz6 followed several weeks after by Fritz6a, and
>>>>Junior6 followed by Junior6a?
>>>
>>>I think they shouldn't be tested separately either, and my understanding is that
>>>they won't be. Doesn't your original statement imply that there should be a
>>>separate entry for Rebel-Tiger than for Chess-Tiger on the SSDF list? That is
>>>certainly how it reads to me.
>>
>>
>>Yes, that's what I mean.
>>
>>Rebel-Tiger with the new improved setting is, I estimate, 20-25 elo points
>>stronger than Tiger 12.0 DOS.
>>
>>If the SSDF melts the results of Tiger 12.0 DOS and RT+new_settings, we are not
>>going to see much change in strength until they play more than 400 games with
>>it.
>>
>>But it happens that these 20-25 points is the difference that has been measured
>>between Tiger 12.0 DOS and our new #1, Junior 6. So this strength difference is
>>of significant importance.
>
>Maybe, maybe not. They could also test a Junior 6.1 if it was marketed that
>way, and it would be listed separately, and presumably also have a higher rating
>than the Junior currently being listed.
>
>>I don't see why asking to test them separately is so wild. Look at the SSDF
>>list, you'll see that several programs of almost equal version have been tested
>>as separate entities: Hiarcs 7 and Hiarcs 7.32, Nimzo 99 and Nimzo 7.32 for
>>example.
>
>Asking to test them separately isn't wild, but it does make a farce of your
>promise. You said "ok, I'm not going to change anything, go ahead and test",
>and that #1 rank your program had for one list probably didn't hurt Tiger's
>sales much, right? Now, you're saying "re-test with a new entry". FAPP, this
>is trying to have your cake and eat it too.
Yes and no. The SSDF knew they were dealing with a pre-release and have already
tested his non-released Tiger 11.8 on a P90. In this case, Christophe wasn't
going against SSDF but rather trying to fulfill to the best of his ability a
more important unspoken promise to his future customers: to release the
strongest program possible. I won't fault him for it, and unfortunately as it
stands, you have a program that simply hasn't been tested on the SSDF. Apart
from all that was mentioned there is also Noomen's excellent opening book which
I do not think was included with the DOS engine. In other words, the results of
the DOS program are not a proper evaluation of Rebel-Tiger. I think it should be
tested (though NOT against it's own DOS brother), and the DOS version's testing
should be frozen.
Albert Silver
>
>> Christophe
>
>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.