Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: sorry not really interesting, only boring blitzchess

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 02:30:52 05/16/01

Go up one level in this thread

On May 16, 2001 at 05:29:24, Uri Blass wrote:

>On May 16, 2001 at 04:30:08, Thomas Lagershausen wrote:
>
>>Not really interesting.Who cares? It´s only stupid blitzchess.
>
>I am sure that this is not the opinion of the programmer of tiger.
>He does not claim that tiger is optimized for long time control.
>
>The results are a surprise for me because I remmeber that I read at the
>rebelboard that the tigers did better results at fast time control(I do not
>remember the exact result but I remember that tiger got more than 50% against a
>some top programs including Junior6a,Fritz(I do not remember the exact version)
>and hiarcs7.32.
>
>I remmeber that the results were always more than 50% but at faster time control
>the % of tiger was bigger with the exception of hiarcs7.32 that is known to be
>relatively weak at long time control.
>
>The results suggested that tiger is clearly better than Deep Fritz at blitz when
>the difference becomes smaller at longer time control,there were no games at
>tournament time control so if we do interpulation

I think that the right word is exterpulation.

 it is not clear if tiger is
>better or worse than Deep Fritz at tournament time control.
>
>Uri

• Re: sorry not really interesting, only boring blitzchess Jeroen van Dorp 06:21:01 05/16/01
  • Re: sorry not really interesting, only boring blitzchess Uri Blass 07:12:03 05/16/01
  • Re: sorry not really interesting, only boring blitzchess Aaron Tay 06:51:57 05/16/01
    • Re: sorry not really interesting, only boring blitzchess Jonas Cohonas 08:20:35 05/16/01

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.