Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 03:44:10 03/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 20, 2001 at 01:50:23, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >On March 20, 2001 at 01:16:31, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On March 20, 2001 at 01:02:54, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>On March 19, 2001 at 20:59:20, gerard sanchez wrote: >>> >>>>I am extemely cusious as to how the best in Computer Chess-Deep Fritz, will fair >>>>up agaist the best in Human Chess. An exhibition 6 game match at standard time >>>>control woul surely inspire huge interest. >>>> >>>>On a second thought, who will represent Computer Chess in the next Dortmonth >>>>Tournament? Will it be Deep Junior again? >>> >>>What claim does Fritz have to be best these days? I know that it's very good, >>>but did it win a world championship recently or something? >>> >>>bruce >> >> >> >>He has won the most difficult event of all times. He is number one on the SSDF >>list. >> >> >> >> Christophe > >Hi Christophe, > >I like this comment! > >Chess Tiger 13, Shredder 5, Gandalf 4.32h, TheKing 3.x, Insomniac, Ferret, >Arthur, Chess Wizard, Zarkov and I think x strong other programs are not listed >in the SSDF but Fritz is here the number 1 ... this is right ! I have explained the reasons for this, for you several times but you happens to ignore it every time. In agreement with Christophe we are awaiting the upgraded patched version of Tiger and Gambit, and it can very well be number one as it was for the christmas list with Tiger12. Shredder5 is included, now more than 500 games, so we know very well the strength of Shredder5, in opposite to some very well known names here in this forum that believes 9, 15 or 20 games in a tournament or three is more accurate. In fact the same persons that can discuss forever if 1000 games is enough to compare programs of about equal strength. Of course they aren't serious and the intention you and only speculate about. It takes some time to play 400-500 games with a new Gandalf4.32h and the program is rather new. But we don't speculates that it is "50 elo better" then the previous version without any proof as you do. Prove it I should love it, because I love Gandalf and its playing style. We are also as you have heard a dozen times, try to include Chessmaster 8000. In fact the most asked question to SSDF is about CM8000. >I can create a more interesting ELO list with programs which are not available >in SSDF to programs which are available in the SSDF ! Good! > >A long discussion in the German CSS forum about this theme, I think the SSDF >list is no more longer accurate, that a chess magazine publish this not complete >list, sorry no all games, very old hardware, 4 of 5 of the strongest programs >are missing and and and ! Speculation and speculation again, why not prove it instead with a few thosands games. Old hardware, if two years old hardware means the results are meaningless you are right otherwise you are wrong. As you know the average computer are over three years old. Are you sure your results on P733 in 40/40 are much more aaccurate then ours on 450 in 120/40. > >It`s for Chess-Base more interesting if more programs fighting for the first >SSDF ranking but a list with 85% Chess-Base programs ís only a good publicity >for Chess-Base and people writing ... now I will see Kasparov vs. Fritz ! As you remember I tried to answer all your questions and attacks in CSS-forum and you said you should answer the questions from me but for some reason you didn't. Bertil SSDF >SUPER SSDF ! >Thanks ! > >Best >Frank
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.