Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:41:47 04/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2000 at 01:10:10, Ed Schröder wrote: >On April 23, 2000 at 23:43:14, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On April 23, 2000 at 19:47:10, Bertil Eklund wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2000 at 15:59:47, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>On April 23, 2000 at 10:27:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 23, 2000 at 04:01:13, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 19:15:20, Pete Galati wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 18:27:14, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 14:46:28, Pete Galati wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 15:02:19, Chessfun wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 14:49:59, Pete Galati wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 14:20:57, A.L.Mourik wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Hello dear CCC friends, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Although earlier reports from e.g. Jouni Uski, suggest an enormous increase in >>>>>>>>>>>>strenght for Crafty 17.10 >>>>>>>>>>>>Nuun 2 match result Fritz6 against Crafty 17.10 ends in a very clear >>>>>>>>>>>>29,5-10,5!! victory for Fritz6. >>>>>>>>>>>>Played on PII 400 8mb for HT, Timecontrol 5 min + 3 sec per move. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>There isn't generally an enormous increase in strength from version to version >>>>>>>>>>>of any program, that's unrealistic to expect there to be. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Your time controls are a bit short there. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Pete >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Why didn't you say or ask that of Jouni when he posted? >>>>>>>>>>as all he said was blitz, that may even have been faster >>>>>>>>>>than this. >>>>>>>>>>Thanks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Sorry, I don't read all posts, this one caught my eye because it was at the top >>>>>>>>>of the board. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>If Jouni played some games this fast or faster, then my opinion would be the >>>>>>>>>same, it's too fast. That isn't to say that I have not run games at that speed, >>>>>>>>>I have, and they were too fast to judge the strength of a program. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Pete >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Why? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Can you please explain why? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You must certainly have some evidence? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Christophe >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Why? Why what? Your question is far too vague. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Pete >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Why is it too fast to judge the strength of a program? >>>>>> >>>>>>Give your evidence. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Christophe >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>One simple answer. Take the top 4 programs on the SSDF and play a very long >>>>>round-robin event, but at blitz time controls. (IE every program plays every >>>>>other program 100 times). Do you think the order will be the same as the SSDF >>>>>list for standard time controls? >>>>> >>>>>I don't. I am certain of it. >>>> >>>> >>>>I'm certain that I would get very valuable information from this. Quickly. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Christophe >>>Hi! >>> >>>You are right in general but for instance Nimzo is much weaker in blitz and >>>Genius is very much stronger in blitz vs tournament time control games. >>> >>>Bertil >> >> >>That's why I wouldn't trust a blitz result blindly. But still, I would get some >>valuable information quickly. >> >>Notice that your remark about Genius is not valid anymore IMO. On current >>computers, Genius has problems even in blitz against the strongest programs. You >>have to go back to Pentium 90 or 486dx2-66 to see Genius competing well in >>blitz. I'm talking about the versions of Genius that have been tested by the >>SSDF. >> >> >> Christophe > >Maybe the argument is not valid for Tiger but the argument is valid >for a lot of other chess programs. Genius was a good example 3-4 >years ago. Nimzo, Rebel doing much better on long time control than >on blitz. IMO the latter is also true for Crafty, I assume Bob will >comment this. Also all of this is also true for Mchess. > >Speaking for Rebel: I NEVER trust (and never will trust) the blitz >results of Rebel as blitz isn't my goal. This might be different for >other programmers who consider blitz as important. For me a perfect >explanation why this difference exists among chess programs. > This is my opinion as well. It was highlighted at the WMCCC event in Paris. Crafty had set an all-time high blitz rating on ICC, and was playing incredibly well at blitz. But in Paris it played really badly. Examination showed that the eval tuning that worked so well at the shallower depths reached in a blitz game were way out of whack in a game where it could reach depths of 12-14 plies. It took about a year to re-tune things for more sane play. As a result, it has done significantly worse at blitz, but is playing much better at standard time controls. Blitz is all about search trickery. Standard is all about knowledge. IMHO. >Ed
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.