Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 05:54:31 04/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2000 at 06:02:13, Dusan Dobes wrote: >Your results are influenced by timecontrol limits. Crafty's and >Scrappy's formulas don't allow full timecontrol range for blitz: >(blitz & time<=5 & inc<4) >That is almost not important against other comps (just a bit against >the automated ones), but it's inflating the rating against humans. > >IMO Crafty is not stronger against humans than against comps. > >Dusan Dobes I am not sure what you mean... crafty will play games as long as anyone wants. Several GM and IM players know the 'password' and are able to play it any time control they want. Most GM players either want to play 5 3, 5 0, or 3 0. A couple play 5 5 but they do no better than they do at 5 3, although all players do better at 5 3 than at 3 0. But regardless of opinion, it definitely plays better against humans, because the eval is tuned on the 'risky' side of things, which is not a real good idea against computers. It works _very_ hard to avoid blocked positions, which is good against humans (particularly at blitz, but also at standard) but not so good against computers as it will accept weaknesses to avoid locked positions. I see that all the time... > >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...
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.