Author: James T. Walker
Date: 06:50:18 12/15/00
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. > > > > Christophe Hello Christophe, I think you have to watch more Shredder games, especially at faster time controls. You will see what is described in a post higher up about Shredder having a 5/6 plus point lead and losing. This is very common at blitz but seems to be less common at longer time controls and presumably with faster hardware. I have never seen a program have these big turnarounds in the games. It seems like it is a highly selective search program that occasionally misses something very important. That may not be the case of course. I would have to study all of these big turnarounds to see if I can figure out what is happening. I don't see Tiger going from +6 to -5 in a couple of moves. In fact I don't remember seeing Tiger losing any games after being +6. I have seen it Draw games after having +5 scores because of a lack of endgame knowledge. This when it thinks the extra minor piece will win when it only draws. Jim
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.