Author: José Carlos
Date: 06:06:29 03/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 13, 2001 at 00:03:19, ERIQ wrote: >first I would like to say that I do not understand how the match was not fair. I >hear two main complaints: > >1) The book > >2) The learning being disabled > >my answer to 1) is that Yes the book did not favor crafty, but it did not favor >CT either as it was CA. 5.1's book. is it good or bad, frankly I'm no expert on >the subject but as both programs had to get both sides of the same or simular >line, I fail to see how either program gets advantage ! It just proves that one >of them could deal with a bad hand better than the other. In short they both had >the same problem lines. I don't know for this particular case, but imagine this extreme situation: Program A has a book that only plays 1.e4 with white. His programmer has included tons of pieces of evaluation to undertand sicilian, italian, spanish... but absolutely nothing about queens gambit, nimzoindian, queens indian... Program B has a wide book. His programmer is not interested in specific knowledge, but has programmed general knowledge. If you take both program's books out, and use a general book, which one would you think would get advantage from the new book? This is not the exactly situation, of course, but helps showing how book and engine and two parts of the same thing: the program. If you change the book, it's the same as if you change the search algorithm of the heuristics. José C. >I noticed also that crafty had good position right out of the opening in several >of the games but as time went on and sometimes got short It loss. A human master >(fide 2400) would have beaten CT in a few of those games or at worst drawn a >few. > >My answer to 2) how much is the learning feature going to really help in only 10 >games anyway, sorry this just sound like a cop out too me. But anyway Crafty >reached equal postions in almost all the games. It seemed to go astray more in >the late middle game, and in the end game, even in what I thought was winning >postions out of the opening. > >Don't get me wrong I do like Crafty I have it as an engine in CA and on the >linux side of my box, but this is not the first match I've seen it take a >beating from that tiger at 5:00 min game. It just looks like CT is a better >blitzer. I've played other matches like 10:00 min game and up and Crafty has won >or been even, but at blitz it alway seems to come up short against CT. > > I think this time Crafty just took a solid beating in ten games nothing more >nothing less. But my point in displaying it was just to show that even the old >tiger is still very very dangerous. > >PS. No teeth missing from that cat :)
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.