Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:08:38 04/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2000 at 15:43:24, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On April 24, 2000 at 15:01:22, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On April 24, 2000 at 14:42:36, A.L.Mourik wrote: >> >>>Hello to everyone, >>> >>>Two days ago I played a Nunn 2 match between Fritz 6 and Crafty 17.10. >>>This whether to check if Crafty as supposed by e.g Jouni Uski was really as good >>>as been told . >>> >>>The result in a Nunn 2 match that I held was disappointing because it ended in a >>>clear 29,5 - 10,5 victory for Fritz6. >>>Timelevel 5min +3 sec. PII 400 each 8 MB HT, pondering off. >>>The only reason that I played a Nunn 2 Match between these two engines, was to >>>TEST which program under equal circumstances, as in this case in the Fritz6 gui, >>>scored the best. This as an indication of the ?chesspower? of that engine. >>>Imho these are the best circumstances with one computer to tell which program >>>produces the best chess. >>> >>>You can?t argue on the fact that the circumstances for the given engines were >>>not the same. >>>As far as I can see it, your only real point is the presumption, that Crafty >>>does a better time saving in the pondering on mode, than Fritz6. >>>So I agree that with testing on two different computers and with both programs >>>pondering on, this presumed negative effect for Crafty would be neutralised. >>>On the other hand I wonder what Morsch or other respectable programmers opinion >>>on these presumption is. >> >> >> >>I'm not sure I am a respectable chess programmer, but I want to ask something: >> >>Why is Crafty's management of pondering supposed to be superior to Fritz'? >> >>Why is pondering=off supposed to handicap Crafty more than Fritz? >> >>Who can seriously believe that Frans Morsch is so lousy that he cannot take >>advantage of pondering as well as Bob does? >> >> >> Christophe > >Here's my question. If pondering=off cripples Crafty so badly to the point that >Bob Hyatt has to write dozens of posts about it, why doesn't he just do >something to fix it? I mean, surely the time spent writing all those posts could >have been put to better use. > >-Tom Because I see little sense in spending a _lot_ of time running on ICC to test the time allocation with ponder=off, and tweaking it to use time in a way I consider to be optimal. Mike Byrne did all the testing for ponder=on and we fiddled with it for several months with him testing non-stop. I don't see any reason to test in a crippled mode. I would be just as interested in trying to make it play better with 1/2 of the evaluation disabled. Interesting to do, but not worth the time.
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.