Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The overall performance of Gandalf 4.32 f is 2545 too low !

Author: pavel

Date: 18:54:20 11/01/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 01, 2000 at 17:42:26, Peter Skinner wrote:

>>unless the results (or similar results) are confirmed by several others, who
>>have messed with 4.32e too, I wuold'nt even drop my pants ;)
>>
>>Pavel
>
>These are personal games for my own benefit. There have been testers of Rebel
>Tiger II that posted games, that on similiar hardware I could not reproduce.
>
>This does not mean my results are false, nor would their's be, it could just be
>one person had better results than others.

I am not saying that your results are false, but it is too complicated. How
often  do you see one version of a program beating a differant version of the
same program, and yet not get enough coverage?
it's unussual, and needs confirmation from more than one person....

Pavel


>
>Perfect example was some of the Rebel Tiger 12.0e users on ICC. Most were
>running on equal Mhz value computers, yet most times there was large gaps in
>rating, even though they were all beating but on the same Crafty clones, and
>other computers. I remember LeTiger(C) was leaps and bounds ahead of the other
>Tiger clones, and none could reproduce it's results.
>
>The only thing I changed my my matches were the hash table settings. All boths
>ran with default settings, and default books.



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.