Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:44:41 08/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2000 at 09:34:31, pavel wrote: >On August 21, 2000 at 08:52:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 21, 2000 at 08:28:59, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 21, 2000 at 08:20:01, Jason Williamson wrote: >>> >>>>On August 21, 2000 at 06:47:02, pavel wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 21, 2000 at 05:55:03, Bertil Eklund wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 21, 2000 at 01:27:23, pavel wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On August 21, 2000 at 01:12:14, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I am determined to be heard. Crafty for tournament play by SSDF should be called >>>>>>>>Crafty V17 as suggest earlier. >>>>>>>>Wayne >>>>>>> >>>>>>>maybe you should put "as suggested by the author himself earlier" >>>>>>> >>>>>>>atleast the guys in SSDF will take it seriously (??). >>>>>>> >>>>>>>or they would say "oh these are a bunch of kids who likes crafty" (joke) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>:) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>pavel >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi! >>>>>> >>>>>>I think we should restart with a later version 17.11 and higher, there is many >>>>>>signs that these versions are clearly better, compare for instance the list for >>>>>>Chessbase engines, where 17.11 is placed much higher than 17.07. >>>>>> >>>>>>Bertil SSDF >>>>> >>>>>IMO there is no need of restarting, since so many games has been played. >>>>>all these games would be a waste then. >>>>>'I suggest' that when you play with crafty next time pls use the latest version >>>>>available and name all the version V17, in this way it will be easier. >>>>>and you dont have to play with every version. just uptodate version 17 with the >>>>>versions that are available...... >>>>>'even better suggestion' use the auto232 to connect chessbase interface with >>>>>winboard, AFAIK there is no hassle at all. and in ICS (internet chess servers) >>>>>there are MANY computer accounts who are playing chessbase engines like that. >>>>>'I am sure' that there is no problem with the autoplayer at all ......... >>>>> >>>>>thanks >>>>> >>>>>pavel >>>>> >>>>>ps, I am sure people probably has better ideas ;) >>>> >>>>This is the idea that makes the most sense to me with engines like Crafty that >>>>will be updated more then once a year. Bascily, SDDF has to just see the fact >>>>there isn't all that much that differnt from 17.7 and 17.11 just some big bug >>>>fixes, while from 16.x and 17.x has a lot of big changes. Basicly, if it was my >>>>rating list I would just measure the main version. >>> >>>I do not understand about what bugs you are talking >>> >>>I read that 17.8 is the version that won the ICC tournament. >>>and I read also that 17.7 is identical to 17.8 about chess moves. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>That is part of the point. Why test both 17.7 _and_ 17.8? And who should look >>at the source to see whether a new version has enough changes to justify testing >>it against the older versions? >> >>_every_ version has had bugs fixed that were in previous versions. Where a bug >>could be something that might make it crash (rare), or either incorrect >>knowledge, or incorrectly implemented knowledge. Or even missing special-case >>knowledge... > > >I was wondering if you would want to cimpile a version for chessbase (as you do >for unix, smp, windows , maicntosh (??) and others). >In this case atleast we can be 'sure' that it is the 'real' crafty. >playing the same moves (though havent tested throughly) doesnt necessary mean >its the same thing. >I believe several things has been taken out of crafty to make it chessbase >compatible. >but again I may be wrong ;) > >pavel I can't. I don't know what they do to the source to make it compatible with their API.. Bob
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.