Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 23:44:01 03/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 08, 2000 at 23:31:04, Tina Long wrote: >I think in computer v computer (home) tournaments, that the table of results is >usually used to tentitivly rank program strength. The program that is being >outplayed by Tal & then wins on time, is not necesarily better than the program >that loses to Tal within the time limit. >I agree it's fair, but I still think that a win for "surviving" until Tal loses >on time, biases the results. So I just wouldn't include CSTal in that type of >time limit match. I'd also EMail the author requesting a Fix for this (in my >opinion) Bug. > >Tina thats my point. cstal was never designed for bean-counting. it was never designed to play blitz games. we tested and tuned 60/60 or 40/120. wqe participated in aegon and on championships. there, cstal never overstepped time as far as i remember. normally i gave cstal 3-5 minutes time less than the official clocks. that was enough. but i never tested blitz games. cstal is a slow program. very slow. even in relation with hiarcs. so why should it be a good blitz program. this would be a contradiction. so why testing or measuring strength in blitz ?
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.