Author: Hans Christian Lykke
Date: 10:56:56 01/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2001 at 06:19:40, Ed Schröder wrote: >On January 16, 2001 at 05:21:08, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On January 16, 2001 at 05:12:12, Ed Schröder wrote: >> >>>On January 16, 2001 at 01:57:59, Hans Christian Lykke wrote: >>> >>>>On January 16, 2001 at 00:32:42, Harald Faber wrote: >>>> >>>>>You can say whatever you want, but this result (and the other auto232 Rebel >>>>>Century results) is absolutely nonsense and out of value. >>>> >>>> >>>>You can say whatever you want, but this result (and the other auto232 Rebel >>>>>Century results) is absolutely necessery and of great value to make the SSDF-list! >>> >>>No great value at all. It will only hurt the creditability of your list. >>> >>>In previous years I already informed SSDF that running Rebel using the >>>autoplayer makes no sense because the autoplayer software hurts the real >>>playing strength of the program and I adviced the SSDF to test Century 1 >>>manually. >>> >>>As a result Century 1 was not included on the SSDF list. I understand the >>>pain of playing manual games and I respected your decision. >>> >>>With Century 3 the question came again. I told SSDF the same story, pointed >>>the the manual that explains about the loss in playing strength and left >>>the choice up to SSDF. >>> >>>It would have been best to follow the same procedure as last year with >>>Century 1, that is, test Century 3 manually or don't play the thing at all. >>> >>>As long as you don't take a producer information serious you can't count >>>on peoples sympathy. >>> >>>If you had taken the time and study Century 3 manual performance versus >>>its autoplayer performance it is not so difficult to figure that Century 3 >>>rating and place on your list highly doubtful. >>> >>>Just do your list a favor and take the trouble to play 100 manual games >>>and you will be surprised. >>> >>>Ed >> >>I think that it may be a good idea to do an automatics analyzis of the games by >>rebel century in order to find mistakes that cannot be reproduced. > >It is not needed. > >New in Century 3 (being in auto232 mode) is that so now and then the >program checks itselfs by doing a 11 ply search (about 10-15 seconds) >from the start position. The total number of nodes is checked and if >they don't match (they should always match of course) the engine is >damaged and an error message is written in the log-file AUTO232.LOG > >Even if only ONE error would occur that is the ultimate proof the >autoplayer software damages Rebel playing strength as suspected since >years. > >The error message "engine damaged" can be found almost without exception >in the log-file after each autoplayer session. I´ve just checked my auto232.log file There is nothing else but: Engine okay!!!!!!! Venlig hilsen Hans Christian Lykke > >You can simulate the "engine check" in Century 3 using ALT_F4 in normal >play. > >All of this was told to the SSDF crew on beforehand. > >Looking at their "you are a bad loser" answer (see this topic) not much >has changed during the years. What a pity. > >Ed > > > >>In order to do it it may be possible to write a program that get the moves and >>the times and check if the games are possible. >> >>I assume that rebel is determinstic against computers but you can correct me if >>I am wrong. >> >>Uri
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.