Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:01:51 04/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2000 at 00:00:41, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 23, 2000 at 22:12:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 23, 2000 at 19:14:44, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2000 at 18:50:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On April 23, 2000 at 16:16:46, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 23, 2000 at 06:33:59, blass uri wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 23, 2000 at 04:15:48, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 23, 2000 at 00:43:49, Chessfun wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 18:35:45, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On April 22, 2000 at 13:13:00, Chessfun wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Since I never got a reply on what those blitz times were on the >>>>>>>>>>previous thread, I played 1 min game, 2 min game, 3 min game and >>>>>>>>>>5 min game. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I was surprized to read that Crafty 17-10 could beat Fritz 6a >>>>>>>>>>in Nunn 1 blitz as no previous version I had was close. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>All games on Cel 433. >>>>>>>>>>Anyone wanting the games email me. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>1 min game Fritz 6a 14.5 - 5.5 Crafty 17-10 >>>>>>>>>>2 min game Fritz 6a 14.5 - 5.5 Crafty 17-10 >>>>>>>>>>3 min game Fritz 6a 13.0 - 7.0 Crafty 17-10 >>>>>>>>>>5 min game Fritz 6a 15.5 - 4.5 Crafty 17-10 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Thanks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>That's a very interesting experiment. Please, keep on playing with longer time >>>>>>>>>controls. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I'm interested in knowing how programs behave when you change the time controls. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Let's see if the result change drastically with much longer time controls. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Christophe >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I have played 10 mins (it's posted now I'm trying 25 then will finish >>>>>>>>at 60 mins. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The original intent was I did not believe the post: >>>>>>>>Sensation Crafty 17-10 beats F6 at nunn 1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Still don't believe it, don't believe the results or the >>>>>>>>games could ever be reporduced. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The hype around the post was all of course it's natural, >>>>>>>>then when F6 wins it's, well, it's only blitz. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Crafty is a fine program, but sometimes there is IMO >>>>>>>>a little bit too much of biased hype surrounding it's >>>>>>>>results. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Thanks. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I bet that you'll get the same result (inside the mathematical error margin), >>>>>>>whatever time control you use. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Christophe >>>>>> >>>>>>I believe that if you do enough games you will not get the same result. >>>>>> >>>>>>It seems that Crafty is better at long time control. >>>>>> >>>>>>Based on blitz results you were right that Crafty is 100 elo weaker than the top >>>>>>programs but it seems based on the ssdf games that Crafty is not 100 elo weaker >>>>>>than the top programs at tournament time control inspite of the fact that crafty >>>>>>does not like the ssdf hardware and could earn more 20 elo rating if it used >>>>>>pentium instead of K6III-450. >>>>>> >>>>>>Crafty is only 97 elo weaker than top Fritz6a and Fritz6a is better than the >>>>>>average top program. >>>>>> >>>>>>Maybe the results of blitz games and tournament games do not prove with 95% >>>>>>confidence that crafty is better at long time control but I guess that it is >>>>>>only because of the fact that the ssdf do not have enough games. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>So you say that Crafty is better at long time controls, but pratically we will >>>>>never know because it is unlikely that enough games will be played to confirm >>>>>your statement. >>>>> >>>>>In this case I think it is much better to assume that Crafty is not better than >>>>>his opponents at long time controls. >>>>> >>>>>That's a simple matter of economy: when it's not necessary to introduce a new >>>>>rule to a model, just don't introduce any new rule. >>>>> >>>>>Introducing fancy new rules everywhere is in my opinion obscurantism. >>>>> >>>>>When you have evidence that the model is incomplete to describe what happens in >>>>>reality, add a rule. >>>>> >>>>>When you have evidence that Crafty is better than other programs at long time >>>>>controls, just tell us. >>>>> >>>>>But until that, I don't believe in your proposition. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>> >>>>You overlook some important data. Ed ran some games with a monster time >>>>control. Do you recall how those came out??? >>> >>> >>> >>>Are you refering to chess 2010...as far as I am aware only nine games >>>were played none by Crafty. >>>Thanks. >> >>Please look again. Crafty played (I believe) 4 games vs rebel. It won 3 and >>drew 1. I don't remember other results... > > > >How can you call this evidence? 4 games? > >Should I understand that you are claiming yourself that Crafty is better at >longer time controls? > > > Christophe Crafty _is_ better at longer time controls. Not necessarily better than Rebel, but better than itself. IE I don't believe it plays very well at blitz, vs other programs. I know it plays better at longer time controls as I watch the games on ICC, FICS and chess.net daily, and there I play plenty of games vs other computers. If I gave the opponent sole power to choose the time controls, you would find that _most_ operators would end up playing me at the fastest time control they could. Because they do better there. I've watched this many times... so much in fact that I even stopped playing computers in bullet because I was losing most of the games, and I didn't want to use those games for 'tuning'. If you want to find out where _your_ program is strongest, put it on ICC, and then hide and watch. Make a graph (after a year) of all the games you have played, and figure out which time control you are playing the most games at. That is your weakest time control. The human operators are 'smart'. :)
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.