Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 13:41:37 03/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On March 18, 1998 at 14:08:05, Amir Ban wrote: >On March 18, 1998 at 11:20:05, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > > >>Fritz5-Junior, no doubles. >> >>Fritz5-Rebel8, 8 doubles. >> >>In this 8 doubles, Rebel 8 drew twice and lost 6. It was caught. >> >>The result was 31.5-8.5 for Fritz. >> >>Without doubles, 24.5-7.5. Remember that Fritz played on a P200MMX and >>Rebel on a P90. >> >>Out of the 774 games played by Rebel 8 and posted by SSDF, 30 are >>doubles, including the ones mentioned above. In these 30 games, Rebel 8 >>lost 14.5-15.5. >> >>All these games are posted by Tony Hedlund. >> >>Enrique > > >I checked this, and I think this is a miscount: It was. You found a bug in Chessbase 6.01. Put the 40 games in the clipboard, ask to mark doubles and it marks 8 or 9, depending on the whim. Manually, after your post, I count 12. Enrique >Of the 40 Fritz5-Rebel8 games, a staggering 16 are duplicates (2 groups >of 7, 1 of 3, and 2 of 2, there would be more if not for random >fluctuations out of book). They contain 10 wins for Fritz, and 6 draws. > >If you omit the duplicates, instead of 31.5-8.5 (78.75%), the result is >18.5-5.5 (77.08%). Hardly a difference worth mentioning. The SSDF say >that doubles are not statistically significant. This result support the >argument. > >The number of doubles are peculiar to Rebel. I didn't see any duplicates >in the match against Junior 4.0, though it doesn't have any learning >whatever. The reason is that it plays with much variation in the opening >book. Getting it to repeat a line is way against the odds. The reason >Rebel has so many doubles is that with its tournament book it has a >rather small repertiore that makes repetition likely. > >By the way, as the other one at the receiving end of this F5 onslaught, >I can say this: I wish the result was better, but I have no problem >accepting it as true. It's hard enough to keep up tactically with Fritz >on equal hardware. If I am invited to a game against it with 3:1 CPU >odds, I would rather not show up, and send a resignation by mail. > >Ed has obviously invested much in the opening book, and the tournament >book it seems was carefully handpicked. I guess Ed was not aware of the >possible implication of playing a small repetoire. It leaves him open to >victimization by learners. In the end, I don't see that victimization >really took place, but anyway no one is forcing him to continue this >practice. > >Ed, my own conclusion from this match is that Rebel was hopelessly >outgunned tactically, and that the duplicates were a curious feature of >it that didn't really change the outcome. If you believe otherwise, I >think you are deluding yourself. > >I posted a suggestion about what should be done about this recently. I >guess I was a bit unclear, so I'll do it in more detail soon. > >Amir
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.