Author: Harald Faber
Date: 21:55:47 11/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 13, 2000 at 21:09:49, stuart taylor wrote: >On November 13, 2000 at 19:58:49, Mogens Larsen wrote: > >>On November 13, 2000 at 19:53:54, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>Is it Junior 6.0 against Tiger 0.95, or Junior 6a against Gambit Tiger 1.0? >>> >>>If so, Gambit Tiger doesn't look very good! >> >>They're both Gambit Tiger. The 1.0 version is the one released commercially and >>the 0.95 version is a previous beta AFAIK. >> >>Mogens. > > >I think I understand now. >Well! that almost makes me want to cry! (together with an emotional Gambit >Tiger). >GT does not look anything special at all according to these results. >GT 1.0 vs. Junior 6a have 17 games over here. > W5/L5/=7 each. And GT was not able to win a single game as Black, Whereas it >managed to lose two games as white, and Junior 6a lost no games as white. > >You might say, "but it's not enough games to indicate very much"! > But I can tell you, that I anyway am always upset to see a program which I >want to get for analysis, and main use, lose even one game, esp. to a previous >generation program, since that indicates some inadequacy somewhere, compared to >something else which is available. I would prefer if they were many draws, even >if only the occasional win. That would look more reliably better. But now, it >looks like in many ways, the old Junior6a is stronger than GT. >S.Taylor Rubbish. 50% score makes J6a look stronger than GT?? Where are you living? It is well known that GT result with "only" 50% score is the worst GT reached, all other opponents GT played better than 50%. And BTW, Thorsten didn't play with Tigers opening book, only a small book.
This page took 0.02 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.