Author: Thomas Lagershausen
Date: 03:14:44 04/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
>>>>Bertil what evidence do you have to say TG's are inferior to deep x's ? >>>>Wayne >>> >>>Here is my guess for the evidence. >>> >>>Gambit1 is probably not better than Deep Fritz on one processor based on Enrique >>>results. >> >>Enrique played 40/40 games.The programs have their own evidence on different >>timecontrols.One example.DeepFritz is on 5min/game 150 Elo Points stronger than >>DeepShredder, on timecontrol 40/120 DeepShredder is 50-70 Elo points stronger >>than DeepFritz.Can you explain that? > >Please, enlighten me, have you received this information from mr Weiner. >I am only aware of 600 games with the normal Shredder and don't believe the >above. If it is true I hope Deep-Shredder takes part in the qualifier, it should Nobody needs Mr. Weiner to see this.I know that you don´t like Mr. Weiner but this has nothing to do with the strongness of Shredder.I can say that i am a strong player and i see a lot of tournamentgames of Shredder.I see moves of a quality that cannot make by Fritz.It is something of be carefull with your own position.You can see this in every game of Shredder.Shredder and Gambit Tiger are programs of a higher level of chess.Sorry this is not more computerchess.Fritz goes in this way, but he has to go still this way a little bit more.It is no question the best program of tournament timecontrols win every year the wourldchampionchip and not the best speedchess program.We know all his name good.It is after Gambit Tiger 2.0 and DeepShredder the best program of the wourld and called DeepFritz.After these three programs there is a gap.Maybe gandalf can compare with DeepFritz, see paderborn but the rest of the wourld has no big chances against it. >win easy if you are right. > >>>Gambit2 is not more than 70 elo better than Gambit1 based on the claims on Rebel >>>sites(I assume at most 50 elo from improving the engine and at most 20 elo from >>>tablebases). >>> >>>It means that Gambit on the same hardware is at most 70 elo better than Deep >>>Fritz. >> >>On tournament timecontrol i would say 100 Elo.See my argumentation before. > >And now it is 100. Hmm, wait for the next sentence. > >>>I guess that 8*700 is at least 4000 in computer chess and it is more than 3 >>>times faster than Gambit on P1333 >>> >>>being 3 times faster is supposed to give more than 70 elo so it means that Deep >>>fritz in 8 processors is better than Gambit on one processor. >> >>You agree with me that Gambit Tiger 2.0 plays moves in almost every game that >>DeepFritz didn´t find in 100 hours computing.So where is your logic? > >And this is maybee 300 better, or.... Well 1983 played Belle a match against two humans with about ELO 2000 with 12 hours per move for Belle.All hardwarefreaks had said Belle has now a strongness by his dephts of plys by Elo 3000.The result was a clear loss of super-belle because he played to much position blunders.Try to understand that chess is something that is more than tactic.At that moment a computer can handle this thing better the humans are without any chance against computers. Greetings Thomas
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.