Author: blass uri
Date: 13:30:39 07/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 2000 at 15:59:31, Chris Carson wrote: >The SSDF Rating List 1997-02-05 >53540 games played by 162 computers > Rating +- Games Won Oppo > ------ --- ----- --- ---- > 1 Rebel 8.0 Pentium 90 MHz 2462 27 736 67% 2336 > 2 MChess Pro 6.0 Pentium 90 MHz 2435 27 683 62% 2350 > 3 Hiarcs 5.0 Pentium 90 MHz 2427 67 121 60% 2359 > 4 Genius 5.0 Pentium 90 MHz 2420 30 558 59% 2352 > > >Avg Rating for the top 4 programs = 2436. > >If DB had a 90% (+36 =4 -0) score against these programs, >then the DB rating in comp vs comp games would have been 2824. >It's TPR against Kasparov was 2862 (human vs comp). +36 =4 -0 score is 95% score and not 90% score. I did not read a claim that Deeper blue did +36 =4 -0 against these programs. I remember a claim that Deep blue Junior That is weaker than Deep blue did 38:2 score against programs but I do not know exactly the name of the programs and it is better for Hsu not to tell the names of the programs because it is better to say nothing when you have no proof. I know that Deep blue Junior lost 3:0 against Rebel and drew 1.5-1.5 against Rebel-tiger. The claim that it was a crippled version does not convince me because they could make it clear before the games and not after the games. My opinion is that if Deep blue Junior really plays well then IBM has nothing to lose today from putting the real Deep blue Junior to play against top programs. If they get only 6-4 or even 5-5 result against Deep Junior the people who do not believe IBM that the version was crippled may change their opinion and the people who did not hear about the fact that Deep blue Junior lost 3:0 against Rebel will probably also not hear about the games between Deep blue Junior and Deep Junior. Uri
This page took 0.04 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.