Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 04:42:12 04/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 2000 at 07:01:06, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On April 27, 2000 at 05:10:16, blass uri wrote: > >>On April 27, 2000 at 02:16:48, Chessfun wrote: >> >>> >>>All games on one Cel 433. >>>Ponder=off. >>>Tablebases used at 25 and longer. >>>Nunn 1 positions. >>>No opening books are loaded. >>> >>> 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 >>>10 min game Fritz 6a 13.0 - 7.0 Crafty 17-10 >>>25 min game Fritz 6a 13.0 - 7.0 Crafty 17-10 >>>60 min game Fritz 6a 15.5 - 4.5 Crafty 17-10 >>>Tourney times Fritz 6a 14.5 - 5.5 Crafty 17-10 >>> >>>Once I figure out how to autoplay from the Nunn 1 opening >>>positions I will play all games with ponder=on. >>> >>>Thanks. >> >> >>Total result 113.5-46.5 indicates 167.5 elo difference between Crafty and >>Fritz6a >>when there is no pondering in the nunn game. >> >>tourney game indicates 180 elo difference and there is no significant >>difference. >> >>The reason may be that nunn1 positions are not good and it is better to use the >>nunn match with positions for practical games(It seemed to me that crafty earns >>more from time based on the ssdf results but maybe I am wrong and Crafty is not >>more than 100 elo weaker than Fritz6a also in blitz). > >I think I know by now, why the Nunn position(s) has been used in this test and >the reason is defendable. But in general I don't think it's a good idea to use >them for testing purposes. A computer chess program is a package deal. If you >purposely remove certain elements, ie. opening book or ponder, you get results >that are purely of academic interest. I your're adament of making a direct >engine to engine comparison _everything_ should be removed including EGTB (if >you're real zealous a third party GUI should be used). And no starting position >should be chosen, which includes Nunn. That's my opinion. > >Best wishes... >Mogens Chr. Larsen >http://home1.stofanet.dk/Moq/ > >"If virtue can't be mine alone, >at least my faults can be my own." This discussion has happened before. The idea has its plusses and minuses. The main plus is that it eliminates 'cooking a book'. The main minus is that even if a program would _never_ play a particular opening in real games, because (perhaps) it isn't well-tuned for some types of pawn structures, it still has to play the position in this particular game. Humans don't play like that.. IE I won't play the french as black because I don't like the cramped position. I won't play the Colle-type positions for the same reason. Ditto closed sicilian as white. It is an interesting test, maybe, although I have never looked at the positions to see what they look like, but it really doesn't say much about how real games will be played, since _everybody_ gets to pick their own openings in real games.
This page took 0.01 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.