Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: few more things to note...

Author: Bertil Eklund

Date: 15:25:11 10/09/00

Go up one level in this thread


On October 09, 2000 at 12:05:06, Mogens Larsen wrote:

>On October 09, 2000 at 07:33:22, pavel wrote:
>
>>dun forget IMO...
>
>I didn't.
>
>>I agree those are results limited to my machine...
>>so whats your opinion about gandalf playing strength? ...lets here it from you.
>>:)
>
>Difficult to say with precision. I think that the rating calculated by Frank Q.
>is quite accurate concerning WinBoard, ie. around 2600. This varies with
>timecontrol. The results by Christian Koch and Frank Quisinsky suggests that
>Gandalf is the strongest WinBoard engine when it comes to standard and quite
>strong at blitz too.
>
>http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?131333 (blitz results)
>
>The rating under CB GUI is slightly lower because it's not a native engine, even
>though the implementation isn't too shabby. A native version would be
>interesting.
>
>>IMO, IMO, IMO, IMO , IMO..........
>
>That doesn't make you immune to critiscism. If you just want to watch your
>opinion on print use a diary.
>
>>hmmm, arent you the the one who posted in winboard forum, results of few games
>>by program X, against other programs and went in to conclusion that "this"
>>engine is better (or worse) than "that" engine?
>
>No.
>
>>yes there is not enough games, and also sometimes you have to go through the
>>games, not just,
>> "play the games, see the results and jump in to conclusions"
>>
>>yes I am pathetic,
>>my speculations are pathetic
>
>No, just your speculations given the data you have in your possession.
>
>>"you are god"  (always right)
>
>Yes, I and don't even rest on Sunday's :o).
>
>Mogens.

Hi!

Why do you believe it's weaker under the CB GUI?

Bertil



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.