Author: David Dahlem
Date: 04:05:48 02/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 14, 2001 at 06:18:48, Leen Ammeraal wrote: >When playing matches, it is obvious that >the number of games should not be too low >and the same applies for the time control >settings. However, my total time to play >and watch matches is limited so I am always >wondering what is best, many quick games >or few more serious games. For example, >which of the following alternatives is >best to estimate the relative strength >of two chess programs? > >12 games with 10 s per move, or >6 games with 20 s per move, or >4 games with 30 s per move, or >3 games with 40 s per move, or >2 games with 60 s per move. > >A related question is this: >If program A is stronger than program B >in a serious game (with realistic time >control settings), how likely is it that A >will also be stronger than B in a quick game? > >Leen Ammeraal I feel the best way to estimate the relative strength of two programs in just a few games is to play a few games without opening books. Then you can safely say the winner is the better of the two at that specific time control, without playing a lot of games. Dave
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.