Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 10:26:49 05/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2000 at 13:13:20, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>On May 19, 2000 at 13:02:48, Ed Schröder wrote:
>
>>On May 19, 2000 at 12:47:11, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>
>>>On May 19, 2000 at 12:39:16, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 19, 2000 at 10:32:44, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On May 19, 2000 at 10:27:04, blass uri wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On May 19, 2000 at 09:42:07, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On May 19, 2000 at 09:37:19, Chris Carson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I am planning to publish an updated list list here with
>>>>>>>>all rated human vs computer results for 40/2 events.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Please let me know your thoughts on the following:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>1. Exclude Performance Rating when 3 or fewer games
>>>>>>>> have been played by a program/hardware.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I don't see why.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>2. Exclude forfiets and protest resignations (Dutch Championship),
>>>>>>>> and games where computers lost due to hardware, IP failures,
>>>>>>>> or operator error.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I would definitely exclude forfeits and IP failures, but not the rest. In my
>>>>>>>opinion, this list is interesting if it reflects the real performance of
>>>>>>>programs in actual games. Hardware failures and operator's errors are part of
>>>>>>>how a program plays. Forfeits and IP failures are not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Enrique
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you really think that losing on time is part of how shredder4 plays?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I do not agree.
>>>>>>I think that operator's error are not part of how a program plays and it is not
>>>>>>fair to include the game that shredder lost on time in a winning position when
>>>>>>the reason was not a bug in the program.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>
>>>>>You are absolutely right. Then, among the problematic games I would count only
>>>>>the games lost because of hardware failure. By the way, are there any? I
>>>>>remember a Rebel-GM game, but Rebel was lost anyway before the machine started
>>>>>developing problems.
>>>>
>>>>The latter is not true. The first crash was right after the first move out of
>>>>the opening book.
>>>
>>>Either you are wrong or you have a lousy arbiter. As I remember it, the first
>>>crash happened immediately before the first time control, when Rebel was
>>>computing move 39 or 40 in a lost position.
>>
>>I have a great arbiter
>
>I know. Best there is... :)
>
>> but with a lousy memory :-))
>
>Nah. Look at the notes I took the day of the Rebel-Hoffman game:
I don't need notes! :-)
><< 40. Rg4 {my version plays b3 at ply 6 after 2 seconds and sticks
>to it, not picking Rg4 at any moment.} 40...
>c4 41. Kg2 {
>my version plays Rg3, not picking Kg2 at any moment.}
>
>All moves before 40.Rg4 could be reproduced.>>
Yes. But in the meantime Rebel lost about 1 hour on the clock due
to all the crashes and I had to play on a fast time control.
>>What I have described below happened, the machine crashed about 10
>>times.
>
>Eleven, all after move 39. It's also in my notes.
10 or 11, who cares :-)
Ed
>> Not every time I have told you because the clock was ticking
>>and ticking.
>>
>>Ed (GM) (great memory)
>
>Pfffff... :)
>
>Enrique
>
>>>About whether we should count games with hardware failures, I answered you in
>>>another post.
>>>
>>>Enrique
>>>
>>>> In total the machine crashed 10 times during the Hoffman
>>>>game -> lots of time loss. Then the machine did not crash when it should
>>>>have crashed and played a blunder move showing a +2.xx score because the
>>>>processor became total crazy. The blunder move was of course not reproducable.
>>>>On that moment Hoffman had a very good position and with perfect play Hoffman
>>>>certainly would have won. But how can you be sure of perfect play? And what if
>>>>it had been the opposite? And what had Hoffman to do with problems of his
>>>>opponent?
>>>>
>>>>I think forfeits and IP troubles (before the game, not during the game) are
>>>>the only reasonable exceptions.
>>>>
>>>>Ed
>>>>
>>>>>Enrique
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.