Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 17:39:35 05/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 21, 2000 at 16:43:43, Chris Carson wrote: >I disagree with you. :) > >1. The Dutch Championship was on hardware >not in the SSDF list. So was some of the >other HW that you mentioned. Isn't the hardware being used in the Dutch championship pretty stiff? (good?) >2. I have published the analysis for SSDF vs >my list several times. Half the TPR's are >above the SSDF and Half are below. That is >what is expected, not exactly the same or always >above SSDF everytime. I didn't check this myself, but I wanted to ask if you did, because it seems rather unlikely that the TPRs for a program in human events would be half above and half below its SSDF rating. >3. The SSDF says perhaps 25 to 50 points could be >lowered from their list. There are an infinite number of adjustments that _could_ be made. ;) >4. The SSDF is the most reliable measure of computer >program strength, IM Kaufman and GM Seiwan have noted that >in published articles. "in the computer vs. computer domain" is a necessary qualifier here. >5. I had a lot of respect for the SSDF before I started the >H vs C list, I have even more respect now! :) Try to publish >a list when people say count this game, don't count that, that >should be counted as a win not a loss, that was a meaningless >will because ..... Yes, I don't like the yada-yada either. <grin> >6. Many GM's are afraid to play the programs. "Many" might be too strong. >7. If you want to subtract x from the SSDF list or my list or >any other list, do so, you are free to your opinion and publish >a list - 200 or + 100 or including this game or excluding that >game. :) > >Best Regards, >Chris Carson
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.