Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:05:07 04/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2001 at 11:09:13, Jeroen Noomen wrote: >On April 24, 2001 at 10:13:29, Albert Silver wrote: > >One ply difference tells a lot, that is true. But chessprogrammers have been >developing the past 4 years and DB is still the same. That could also be a >difference. > >F.e.: Maybe DB cannot stand an attacking program like Gambit Tiger. And when I >look at DB's games I think it is positionally weaker than many top programs. I think the other question is the issue... can GT withstand DB? Remember that in the original games played against commercial programs in 1997, DB was crushing them all. And it was crushing them all by playing kingside attacks. That was Hsu's main criticism of Genius and Rebel.. they were totally oblivious to the coming storm, until it hit. The games were not endgames. They were middlegame crushes. GT seems to be no better than anybody else at seeing attacks against itself. In fact, it often self-attacks by being too aggressive. I think against DB that would be suicide. > >Of one thing I am sure: If DB and f.e. Gambit Tiger play on equal hardware, DB >is going to be crushed. > >Jeroen The concept makes no sense. DB _is_ hardware. There was never any plan on being "equal". The only match result we know about on nearly equal hardware was the 40 games played by Hsu and Murray a few years back... we all got racked...
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.