Author: pavel
Date: 07:51:13 09/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 24, 2000 at 10:36:23, Harald Faber wrote: >On September 24, 2000 at 10:26:18, pavel wrote: > >>On September 24, 2000 at 10:20:46, Harald Faber wrote: >> >>>On September 24, 2000 at 10:10:01, Eddie wrote: >>> >>>>Did you play Tiger/K7-500 against Shredder4/K6-200 ?? These are two completely >>>>different speeds of processor correct? What kind of results would you expect >>>>from such?!! The faster the computer, the better the results is all this >>>>means ........ >>> >>>Yes, Tiger had the Athlon-500 and 96MB hash while Shredder had the K6-200 with >>>24/8MB hash, g/120. As I said before, the first 7 games which Tiger played >>>wihtout the London-book, Shredder won by 4.5-2.5 (+4 =1 -2) on the slower >>>hardware! >>> >> >>so you agree, its the book that did the trick not the engine :) >> >>Pavel >> > >Only in a limited way, see my other post. >Tiger did not win one game out of the book. >Tiger is now out of book with positions Tiger is able to "understand" and win. >I am sure that many other programs also would have lots of trouble with the >small and unsound original book (AFAIK it is the LChess book), so no need to >question Tigers performance and reduce it to book efforts. ofcourse I am not underestimating its performance, as I have seen good number of games played by it in chess servers (the beta version). And most of the games were impressive. I have a very good number of its games saved in pgn formats, and I am kinda studying the games with other programs. well you can say its another kinda beta-testing ;)) Pavel
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.