Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 08:56:08 02/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 25, 2001 at 11:04:52, Amicitia Stone wrote: >This is just the way I see things: > >Most impressive result: Yace 0.99x 5th place (Wonderful) >runner-up: Comet B.31 7th place (Still had 5.0/9 just like Yace) Very good indeed.... >Most disappointing result: Nimzo 8.0 11th place (What happend?!) >runner-up: P. ConNerS 10th place (How many processors does this thing need to >win?!) I expected more from it.... > >The team I feel most happy for: Deep Shredder 5.0 (Congrats!) >runner-up: Holmes 0.74 (Nice try! I hope it was a good experience!) The pattern and story continues.... >The team I feel bad for: Deep Fritz Paderborn (Soooo close! 2nd ain't bad!) >runner-up: Nimzo 8.0 (obvious reasons. It wasn't even going to enter the >tounament. I bet they regret it.) Same pattern... Put it into the autoplayer and it wins every long match. Starting slowly but in the end the learner gets the other computer opponent. Manual tournaments and autoplayer tournaments are different stories. Wish it was different and it would give an equal pattern. Ed >My predictions before the tournament started: >1)Deep Shredder 5.0 >2)Deep Fritz Paderborn >3)Nimzo 8.0 >4)Gromit 3.8 > >Hey, 3 out of 4 ain't bad! > >Overall this was a great tounri, it really came down to the wire. But hey, who >are we kidding? I think in the back of our minds we all knew Shredder would win.
This page took 0.01 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.