Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 08:59:48 11/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2000 at 04:06:32, Harald Faber wrote:
>On November 18, 2000 at 20:00:14, Aloisio Ponti Lopes wrote:
>
>>Thüringen Mohlsdorf 2000
>>
>>Junior 6.0 Athlon 1000 +1 -1 +1 +0 -1 1 5.0/6
>>Deep Fritz 2x P3-866 -½ +1 +1 -1 +½ r 4.5/6
>>Nimzo 7.32 Athlon 1000 -½ +1 -0 +1 -1 3.5/6
>>Gambit Tiger 1.0 Athlon 500 -1 +0 -1 +½ -½ 3.5/6
>>Shredder 4.0 Athlon 800 -1 +1 -0 +0 -1 3.5/6
>>Chess Tiger 13.0 P3-840 +½ -0 +1 -1 +0 3.0/6
>>Hiarcs 7.01 P3-500 -½ +1 -½ -½ +0 3.0/6
>>Goliath Light 2.0ß Athlon 650 +½ -0 +0 -1 +1 3.0/6
>>Rebel Century - Athlon 1000 -0 +0 -1 +1 -½ 3.0/6
>>Zarkov 5.01 Athlon 1000 +½ -0 -½ +1 +0 2.5/6
>>Hiarcs 7.32 Athlon 1100 +0 -½ +½ -0 +1 2.5/6
>>Gandalf 4.32f Athlon 1000 +0 -1 +½ -0 -0 2.0/6
>>Chigorin's Way Cel. 500 -0 +½ -0 +0 +½ 1.0/6
>>Chessmaster 6000 P2-400 +1 -0 +0 -0 -0 2.0/6
>>
>>I can't understand why Gambit Tiger was running on an Athlon 500. Can someone
>>explain please?
>>
>>A. Ponti
>
>
>Sure. I have no faster computer. :-)
>The next tourney is in March 2001, everyone feel free to provide me with the
>latest hardware so that I can start with GT on 1.3GHz or so. Or collect money so
>that I can afford to upgrade my computer to at least 1GHz.
>If you don't then don't complain about the hardware. All the critics here and in
>the German Gambitsoft forum are invited to play themselves on fast machines.
>BTW maybe I missed that I could have used an Athlon 1000 for extra money,
>provided by the tournament director. Don't know, will figure this out for the
>tourney in March. But the several system crashes of all these fast machines
>showed that it was better to use the K7-500 (which didn't crash even once) if
>you look at the final result...
Thank you Harald for playing with Gambit Tiger in this tournament.
I hope you don't take the critics personally.
It had not been made clear when the tournament was announced that individuals
were participating with their own hardware, so some Tiger supporters here felt
it was not fair.
On the other hand, a close look at the final result shows that Gambit Tiger has
been performing extremely well in this tournament, given the hardware handicap.
The problem is the people that will just have a look at the rankings and say,
"What, Gambit Tiger finished only in 4th position? This program sucks!".
But we have been having this problem for a long time with people not able to
read the SSDF list correctly, so it's nothing new.
I'm rather satisfied with the performance of Gambit Tiger in this tournament.
Once again, GT has proven that it was possible to play strong with an
interesting playing style. And that Gambit Tiger is probably more suited for
short tournaments than Chess Tiger...
Thanks Harald.
Christophe
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.