Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:59:30 04/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 07, 2001 at 13:49:52, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 06, 2001 at 04:22:45, Harald Faber wrote: > >>On April 05, 2001 at 22:48:04, Mike Castañuela wrote: >> >>> >>>Taken from ElPais Digital (spain): >>> >>>(Brief resume: Enrique Irazoqui is planning to organize the tournament to decide >>>the best program (between 3, the Deeps Fritz, Junior and Shredder) which will >>>contend vs. Kramnik in Bahrein, at date not yet determined. >>>(Ah, and DeepBlue, but the difficulty of which this is made is obvious)). >>> >>>I hope that this match is to be carried (seems very obvious) >>>with the presence of the programmers, which is essential to make the tourn >>>valid (ethically speaking). >>> >>>Also, a question more: why not more programms at the contest >>>(e.g. Gambit-Tiger comes to my mind as a very plasible option, mainly by its >>>style). >> >> >>What reference does Tiger have in comparison with Deep Fritz and Shredder? >>Shredder is the current world champion, Deep Fritz leads the SSDF. Unless >>Tiger14 or GambitTiger2 will top the SSDF, the decision will certainly be made >>between the 2 mentioned programs. >>Don't get me wrong, I'd also like to see one of the Tigers play, but for >>officials there will be no justification. > > > >You have a point. For people who are absolutely ignorant about what's going on >in computer chess, I guess that BattleChess or ChessMaster 2000 would be the >programs of choice. They are definitely more famous for the general audience. > >Come on. > >You say that Tiger has less references that Shredder for example? Then when was >the last time Shredder has topped the SSDF list? Answer is NEVER. For Tiger it >was just one year ago, and who knows what is going to happen with Tiger 14. >Before October comes, we will know anyway. > >The choice of Fritz, Junior and Shredder is 100% arbitrary. > >Anyway the most important factor in this match is not going to be the speed of >the computer. Chosing these programs because they can run on multiprocessor PCs >is a joke. The strength difference of one, two or 4 processors when you face a >human player does not matter much. Ask Bob. First thing is that I expect the program that play kramnik to use 8 processors and not only 2 or 4. My guess is based on an email of Enrique when he told me that probably the opponent to play against kramnik is going to use 8 processors. I also think that 8 proccesors is better than one against humans. I do not like the idea of not giving tiger the option to participate in a tournament to decide about the opponent that plays against kramnik but every program should get the same hardware that it is going to use against kramnik and it may mean 8 processors for Deep Fritz,Deep Junior,Deep shredder and only one processor for tiger(unless you do a version that can use more than one processor before the match). I guess that it means that Fritz,Junior and Shredder are going to have a significant advantage of about 4:1 in speed against Tiger.(I guess only 4:1 because of 2 reasons: 1)8 processors mean less than 8 times faster than one 2)I guess that it is going to be something like 8*1000 against 1300 and not 8*1000 against 1000 It does not mean that tiger has no chance because I remember cases when Shredder won WCCC inspite of significant hardware advantage of some opponents(Ferret,Fritz,Junior). > >The thing that will really matter in this match is PLAYING STYLE. You can choose >at random between Fritz, Shredder and Junior, it does not matter, they play the >same kind of chess. > >If you want to put a strong player under pressure, I think I have a point if I >say that Gambit Tiger has more chances to do it than the 3 others. I see no proof for it because I do not know about results of tiger against strong humans so I cannot tell if it is stronger or weaker than other programs against humans. Uri
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.