Author: Leen Ammeraal
Date: 09:43:29 02/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 14, 2001 at 11:28:48, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >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. >> > >Leen, you are in the same situation as I am. >I am not an expert on testing, so this is an opinion: >I try to do a combination, for instance, 1 game at 60 s/move and 6 games at >10s/move if I follow your example. >Then I try to look closely to the games. Since I have to rely on observation, >thousands of games are not very useful either! >I think that quick and slow games tell us different stories. >For instance, mistakes in slow games are not being easily overcome with >search. > >>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 do not think it is unlikely with programs in development >(politically correct term :-). >It happens with mine. At superquick games (1-2 min), it loses often to TSCP >at 30 min/game Gaviota beats TSCP most of the time. >Gaviota has hashtables and TSCP does'nt. That is one of the reasons, I think >but there could be many other ones in different programs, null move, better >ordering etc. If a program has a better branching factor should perform >relatively better at slower time controls. Shouldn't it? > >Miguel Miguel, thank you for your answer. I may use this opportunity to tell you that I use your program, gav012.exe, quite often to play matches with my program, the WinBoard version of which is named wbqueen.exe. Both programs are about the same strength, I think. About TSCP, the curious thing about this is that this program always responds immediately, so it does not surprise me that our programs can beat it so easily. Or do you have other experiences with the WinBoard/TSCP combination? Leen http://home.wxs.nl/~ammeraal/
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.