Author: Mark Young
Date: 15:46:30 03/17/98
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 1998 at 17:02:16, Scott Carmichael wrote:
> For the past several weeks I have been playing Fritz 5.0 vs. Hiarcs
>6.0 on identical computers, with the same amount of ram allowed for each
>(32Mb). I have been testing them manually at various preset time
>controls, and have added no powerbooks, or additional data to either
>program. The only modification that has been done is to take the
>database which is included with Fritz (out of the box, as you say), and
>use the import tree feature to include these games in the programs
>opening tree. Both programs are installed upon a hard drive, and neither
>are interupted unless Fritz 5.0 asks for the endgame tablebases, which
>come with the software.
> In these games, Fritz 5.0 has scored an amazing 60% of wins, with
>only 7% of all games being drawn. In fact the only program I own which
>has scored well against Fritz 5.0 is MChess Pro 5.0, and then only at
>games played at G/30 or less.
> Can anyone offer me a plausible explanation as to these results? I
>have trusted the SSDF for years, and have maded my purchases according
>to the combination of their evaluations and the results of various well
>known Comp. vs. Comp. tournaments. It saddens me to think that they have
>allowed any manufacturer to ruin the well deserved faith that so many of
>us have placed in them over these years.
>
>Thank you for your input,
>Scott Carmichael
It sounds like you like to test chess programs for yourself even as I
do, and it sounds like your results for Fritz 5 are similar to mine.
Since this is the case I would say that Fritz 5 is living up to (or at
least nearly living up to) its SSDF rating. Currently I am testing Fritz
5 vs. Junior 4.6 at 40 moves in 3 hours and posting the games on CCC. It
will be interesting to see if its performance continues to be high
against the current world computer chess champion. Also, just a bit of
advice, trust your own results as long as you keep the testing
procedures simple and unflawed. I have noticed that others'
imput/comments/results tend to be motivated by their feelings more than
their desire to truly gauge a program's strength. The best way to really
gauge a program's strength is ultimatly to test it yourself and see how
well it plays against other programs AND people.
Now as far as the SSDF is concerned, its a fine organization but its
definately not, and never will be, unflawed. They have made many
mistakes in the past and I'm sure that this trend will continue. So you
can always take the SSDF's information as a general guide but by no
means can its results be trusted as ultimately accurate.
Mark Young
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.