Author: Will Singleton
Date: 22:26:07 04/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2000 at 23:53:31, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>As I had mentioned a while back, I have a sack full of quad xeon 550 machines
>in a beowulf cluster. While waiting on a few final pieces to arrive, I decided
>to do what I thought was an interesting test:
>
>two identical machines, and I mean _identical_. Quad xeon 550's, 27 gigs of
>SCSI disks in a raid-0 (striping) configuration, 512mb of ram, etc. IE
>everything is identical, with all the 3-4-5 piece compressed tablebases,
>same opening books, etc.
>
>The only difference was that 'crafty' plays computers and humans, while scrappy
>only plays humans. Several of us had postulated over the years that if you only
>play humans, you can drive your rating through the roof. Using the same
>formulas (5 3 blitz or faster, 60 60 standard or faster, or most any bullet)
>I have been watching the two programs for a month now. And they seem to
>hover at the point scrappy == crafty+100, roughly. Standard has crafty
>actually higher, but that is because crafty is playing standard against
>computers, while scrappy is playing very little standard as humans seem to be
>avoiding that for the most part... and those that do play standard play crafty
>as it is better known.
>
>100 points was a surprise... as I thought it would be more. At present crafty
>is at 31126 and scrappy is at 3219 blitz (which is the most stable ratings since
>most games are blitz).
>
>It seems that not playing computers is _not_ a way to grossly inflate your
>rating, unless you consider 100 as inflated. Note that a rating of 3200 is
>very high, considering that there are not a lot of GM players that are rated
>even 3000. I watched scrappy play a 16 game match earlier this week, it won
>8 games, lost one, then one 7 more, for a 15-1 result (5 3 blitz). It lost 32
>rating points for the effort. :)
>
>I am going to continue the experiment until I get the rest of the beowulf
>hardware (another quad box and a fast ethernet switch to complement the
>giganet switch). If you watch the ratings, you will get a feel for the
>difference in playing only humans and humans + computers...
I have been doing the same thing, with very similar results:
-----------------------------
Information about Amateur(C) (Last disconnected Mon Apr 17 2000 14:30):
rating [need] win loss draw total best
Bullet 2588 1188 333 189 1710 2622 (25-Mar-2000)
Blitz 2606 4403 2324 884 7611 2634 (14-Jun-1999)
1: Amateur 0.99k
4: Will play humans and computers, and will accept unrated matches.
-----------------------------
Statistics for squirtle(C) On for: 5:46 Idle: 2
rating [need] win loss draw total best
Bullet 2680 193 5 10 208 2708 (13-Apr-2000)
Blitz 2726 515 27 43 585 2726 (20-Apr-2000)
1: Amateur 0.99k
2: This account will play humans only.
-----------------------------
I think I'll try !computers vs. !humans. I expect the computer-only player will
lose another 50-100 points.
Will
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.