Author: Alvaro Rodriguez
Date: 04:08:05 04/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2000 at 03:25:01, blass uri wrote: >On April 16, 2000 at 02:11:59, Chessfun wrote: > >> >>Maybe settings should be called CM6K Jorge less confusion at >>a much later date with some CM8K settings. >> >>Anyway I read the post and stopped the current 100 game match >>I had running at 2hrs/40 moves 1 hr rest between CM6000 and CM6666. >> >>I have thus far played 10 games 1 hr/side game. >>Score CM6666 W3 L5 D3 CM8888 W5 L3 D3 looks like CM8888 will also >>win game 11. Just did haha. >> >>For me I have no interest in what is stronger at 15 mins I am more >>interested in longer games. Besides which for it to prove to be stronger >>than CM 6666 would require a lot more games. For it to prove to be stronger >>against other engines is another matter completely, beating CM 6666 don't >>mean it will do better against Fritz and the like. Though I did read it had >>scored well again the number of games still leaves a large margin of error. > >I think that the different values for qhite and black queen is illogical. >It may help against other programs because they do not understand that counting >pawns is not important in queens endgames with passed pawns but I do not expect >it to help against chessmaster personalities. > >Uri I think that the important thing here is to performe well against other programs, not against cm personalities..IMHO I agree that the queen value seems a little bit illogical, but what if it works? We just have to wait and see.. Alvaro
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.