Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 23:17:58 12/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 2000 at 21:01:38, Christophe Theron wrote: >On December 13, 2000 at 23:38:41, Laurence Chen wrote: > >>In this position Shredder 5 played the losing move 36. h4??, it could have drawn >>the game with the move 36. g3! It took Shredder at least 30 min. in my Pentium >>III 600e with 128 MB Hash Table to evaluate the position as close to 0.00 >>(-0.01), it took Hiarcs 7.32 a few seconds to find 36. g3!, however the >>evaluation was -0.76. Perhaps Shredder 5 will benefit the most on a super fast >>computer and at a longer time control. > > > >I don't see any reason to believe that Shredder would benefit more from faster >computers. > >I'm always very skeptical when I read such claims. In the past it has always >been used as an excuse for programs that were allegedly very strong but failed >to demonstrate it. > >Dig into the CCC archives and check what I say. > >The escape was always "it will be better with faster computers or with longer >time controls". Which is an easy escape, because at the time the faster >computers were available a new version of the program was available too, so it >was then out of question to test the older one. > >I want to say that this is not an attack against Shredder. This program is >strong, and does not need IMO the "benefits more from faster computers" excuse. > >But I read this unjustified excuse so often that I think it's time to react. It is not an excuse. The program, as well as the opening book are made to give the most at long time levels. So it is true that the program plays better at 60 minutes game or higher. I don't know about the new Chess Tiger, I don't have it yet. I'll find out! Anyway congratulations to you and your team. My friends told me that your latest programs are really good! Ciao Sandro > > > > 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.