Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Preparing for CCT3 - Testing the Palm Tiger

Author: Christophe Theron

Date: 00:20:36 05/22/01

Go up one level in this thread


On May 22, 2001 at 02:24:29, Uri Blass wrote:

>On May 21, 2001 at 23:11:25, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On May 21, 2001 at 17:11:28, Peter Berger wrote:
>>
>>>The ultimate match - the newest Bringer version by Gerrit Reubold (
>>>http://www.reubold.onlinehome.de)
>>>on some new fast Athlon toy ( which has spent most of the last week in the
>>>computer shop being repaired
>>>but now seems to be ready for action at last)
>>>
>>>against Chess Tiger 14.1 for the Palm Vx - overclocked it runs at :
>>>
>>>Opening: 	295 NPS
>>>Middlegame:	442 NPS
>>>Endgame:	560 NPS
>>>
>>>Timer frequency: 100 Hz
>>>
>>>This really is a thrilling little thingy - dunno how strong but it's _so_ "nice"
>>>and tiny ...
>>>
>>>First game showed the Tiger far away from the ELO 2200 it claims to have playing
>>>like some patzer IMHO  - then came the
>>>second game .
>>>
>>>Well , after a good opening by the Tiger this one showed a very well-known
>>>weakness of Bringer - a slight misunderstanding
>>>when it is about bad bishops - when there is no pawn lever left and you can't
>>>enter the
>>>opponent's camp you shouldn't be too confident to be able to take advantage of
>>>the situation.
>>>
>>>Bringer running on an Athlon 1333 was very close to be the first victim of some
>>>dirty jokes here against
>>>the Palm Tiger which was at about the same size as the Bringer's mouse ..
>>>
>>>Fortunately the Cretan snake goddess who recently entered the Bringer team by
>>>courtesy of Arturo Ochoa helped out :
>>>
>>>Chess Tiger 14.1 for the Palm blundered horribly in a dead drawn position with
>>>42. ... Kd8 ????
>>>
>>>So Bringer won with 2-0 as expected - yet a funny feeling remains ...
>>>
>>>pete
>>>
>>>[Event "Game in 30"]
>>>[Site "Testgames"]
>>>[Date "2001.05.21"]
>>>[Round "1"]
>>>[White "Palm Tiger 14.1"]
>>>[Black "Bringer1.9ß02"]
>>>[Result "0-1"]
>>>
>>>1. d4  Nf6  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } 2. c4  e6  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } 3. Nc3
>>>Bb4  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } 4. e3  c5  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } 5. a3  Bxc3+  { 0.00
>>>0:00:00.0 }
>>>6. bxc3  d6  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } 7. dxc5  dxc5  { 0.00/13 0:01:04.9 }
>>>8. Qxd8+  Kxd8  { 0.00/1 0:00:00.0 } 9. a4  Ke7  { 0.23/13 0:00:34.3 }
>>>10. a5  Rd8  { 0.31/14 0:00:39.2 } 11. f3  Rd6  { 0.59/13 0:00:47.9 }
>>>12. e4  Ra6  { 0.94/13 0:00:36.9 } 13. Be3  Nfd7  { 1.10/15 0:01:26.3 }
>>>14. g3  Nc6  { 1.25/14 0:00:33.2 } 15. f4  b6  { 1.24/13 0:00:39.0 (PB:
>>>0:00:38.9 ) }
>>>16. Nf3  Nxa5  { 1.51/14 0:02:00.4 (PB: 0:02:00.3 ) } 17. Bd3
>>>Nxc4  { 2.06/15 0:00:27.4 } 18. Ke2  Rxa1  { 2.12/15 0:00:28.2 }
>>>19. Rxa1  Nxe3  { 2.15/14 0:00:25.7 (PB: 0:00:25.6 ) } 20. Kxe3
>>>a5  { 2.16/13 0:00:25.3 (PB: 0:00:25.2 ) } 21. e5  h6  { 2.22/13 0:01:14.9 (PB:
>>>0:01:14.8 ) }
>>>22. Be4  Ra7  { 2.25/13 0:01:39.1 } 23. Bc6  Nb8  { 2.37/14 0:00:34.3 }
>>>24. Bb5  Bd7  { 2.47/14 0:00:23.6 } 25. Rb1  Bxb5  { 2.92/16 0:00:24.4 }
>>>26. Rxb5  Nd7  { 2.74/14 0:00:21.8 (PB: 0:00:21.7 ) } 27. Rb3
>>>a4  { 3.29/16 0:00:35.8 } 28. Ra3  b5  { 3.27/15 0:00:44.7 (PB: 0:00:10.2 ) }
>>>29. Kd3  b4  { 3.35/15 0:00:29.6 } 30. cxb4  cxb4  { 3.51/14 0:00:56.6 (PB:
>>>0:00:08.9 ) }
>>>31. Ra1  Rc7  { 3.52/14 0:01:35.9 (PB: 0:01:35.8 ) } 32. Nd4
>>>Nc5+  { 3.87/13 0:00:24.1 } 33. Ke3  b3  { 4.27/14 0:00:22.2 }
>>>34. Rb1  a3  { 5.52/14 0:00:22.0 } 35. Nxb3  Rb7  { 5.53/13 0:00:26.4 (PB:
>>>0:00:26.3 ) }
>>>36. Ra1  Rxb3+  { 5.55/13 0:00:40.4 (PB: 0:00:40.4 ) } 37. Kd4
>>>Nb7  { 5.47/12 0:00:20.5 (PB: 0:00:20.4 ) } 38. Ra2  Rb4+  { 5.66/11 0:00:34.1 }
>>>39. Kc3  Ra4  { 5.71/12 0:00:28.2 (PB: 0:00:28.1 ) } 40. Kb3
>>>Nc5+  { 5.74/12 0:00:31.7 } 41. Kc3  f5  { 5.88/11 0:00:24.2 }
>>>42. Ra1  g5  { 6.20/11 0:00:23.1 } 43. fxg5  hxg5  { 6.87/11 0:00:17.8 }
>>>44. Ra2  f4  { 7.10/12 0:00:25.2 } 45. gxf4  gxf4  { 7.61/12 0:00:18.2 (PB:
>>>0:00:07.7 ) }
>>>46. h4  f3  { 9.82/12 0:00:31.3 } 47. h5  f2  { 11.67/10 0:00:17.1 }
>>>48. Ra1  Re4  { 12.56/10 0:00:16.2 (PB: 0:00:16.2 ) } 49. Rf1
>>>a2  { 18.70/11 0:00:48.8 (PB: 0:00:48.8 ) } 50. Ra1  Re1  { Matt in 9/10
>>>0:00:39.1 }
>>>51. Rxa2  f1=Q  { Matt in 9/1 0:00:08.6 (PB: 0:00:08.6 ) } 52. Ra7+
>>>Ke8  { Matt in 9/1 0:00:26.8 (PB: 0:00:26.8 ) } 53. Ra8+  Kd7  { Matt in 9/1
>>>0:00:23.9 (PB: 0:00:23.8 ) }
>>>54. Ra7+  Kc6  { Matt in 9/1 0:00:29.6 (PB: 0:00:29.5 ) } 55. Rd7
>>>Kxd7  { Matt in 8/1 0:00:00.0 } 56. Kb4  Rb1+  { Matt in 8/1 0:00:00.0 }
>>>57. Kxc5  Qd3  { Matt in 7/1 0:00:00.0 } 58. h6  Rb5+  { Matt in 1/1 0:00:00.0 }
>>>
>>>0-1
>>>
>>>[Event "Game in 30"]
>>>[Site "Testgames"]
>>>[Date "2001.05.21"]
>>>[Round "2"]
>>>[White "Bringer1.9ß02"]
>>>[Black "Palm Tiger 14.1"]
>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>
>>>1. d4  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } d5  2. c4  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } e6  3. Nc3  { 0.00
>>>0:00:00.0 }
>>>Nf6  4. Bg5  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } Be7  5. e3  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 }
>>>O-O  6. Nf3  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } Nbd7  7. Bd3  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 }
>>>c5  8. O-O  { 0.20/12 0:00:47.2 } dxc4  9. Bxc4  { 0.24/12 0:00:39.6 }
>>>a6  10. a4  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } cxd4  11. exd4  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 }
>>>Nb6  12. Bb3  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } Bd7  13. a5  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 }
>>>Nbd5  14. Bxd5  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } Nxd5  15. Nxd5  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 }
>>>exd5  16. Bxe7  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 } Qxe7  17. Re1  { 0.00 0:00:00.0 }
>>>Qb4  18. Qd2  { 0.17/13 0:00:40.4 } Qxd2  19. Nxd2  { 0.15/14 0:00:55.5 (PB:
>>>0:00:55.5 ) }
>>>Rfe8  20. Nb3  { 0.21/15 0:00:39.8 } Rac8  21. Nc5  { 0.31/15 0:00:51.8 }
>>>Bc6  22. f4  { 0.34/14 0:01:07.8 (PB: 0:00:07.8 ) } f6  23. Rxe8+  { 0.36/15
>>>0:00:39.2 }
>>>Rxe8  24. Kf2  { 0.35/15 0:00:55.8 (PB: 0:00:55.8 ) } Kf7  25. b4  { 0.37/14
>>>0:00:47.0 (PB: 0:00:47.0 ) }
>>>Re7  26. Rc1  { 0.41/14 0:00:29.8 } Kg6  27. g4  { 0.42/14 0:00:48.3 }
>>>h5  28. h3  { 0.37/14 0:00:27.7 } Bb5  29. Re1  { 0.42/14 0:00:30.8 }
>>>Rxe1  30. Kxe1  { 0.41/14 0:00:18.1 } hxg4  31. hxg4  { 0.39/15 0:00:30.0 }
>>>Bc6  32. Ke2  { 0.34/14 0:00:47.0 (PB: 0:00:19.7 ) } f5  33. g5  { 0.48/15
>>>0:00:32.5 }
>>>Kf7  34. Kd2  { 0.47/16 0:00:26.4 (PB: 0:00:08.2 ) } Ke7  35. Kd3  { 0.41/16
>>>0:00:37.3 }
>>>g6  36. Ke2  { 0.33/17 0:00:38.3 } Kd6  37. Kd2  { 0.31/17 0:00:38.1 }
>>>Ke7  38. Nd3  { 0.30/16 0:00:39.4 } Kd6  39. Ne5  { 0.30/17 0:00:33.6 }
>>>Be8  40. Kc2  { 0.30/16 0:00:46.8 (PB: 0:00:46.8 ) } Kc7  41. Kc3  { 0.29/17
>>>0:00:42.8 (PB: 0:00:42.8 ) }
>>>b6  42. Kb3  { 0.29/16 0:00:26.2 (PB: 0:00:26.1 ) } Kd8  43. axb6  { 1.84/17
>>>0:00:35.8 }
>>>Kc8  44. b5  { 1.79/18 0:01:50.5 (PB: 0:01:50.4 ) } Kb7  45. Kb4  { 2.72/17
>>>0:00:57.0 (PB: 0:00:56.9 ) }
>>>Kxb6  46. bxa6  { 4.20/17 0:00:19.9 } Kxa6  47. Kc5  { 4.95/16 0:00:17.4 (PB:
>>>0:00:17.3 ) }
>>>Ka5  48. Kxd5  { 8.09/17 0:03:06.9 (PB: 0:03:06.8 ) } Kb6  49. Ke6  { 9.72/15
>>>0:01:17.5 }
>>>Kc7  50. d5  { 11.60/15 0:01:19.6 } Kd8  51. Nc6+  { 12.15/15 0:00:20.2 }
>>>Kc7  52. Ke7  { 11.75/16 0:00:16.7 } Bxc6  53. dxc6  { Matt in 22/13 0:00:06.8 }
>>>Kxc6  54. Kf7  { Matt in 22/1 0:00:11.4 (PB: 0:00:11.3 ) } Kd5
>>>55. Kxg6  { Matt in 15/1 0:00:00.1 } Ke4  56. Kf6  { Matt in 13/1 0:00:00.0 }
>>>Kxf4  57. g6  { Matt in 12/1 0:00:00.0 } Ke4  58. g7  { Matt in 11/1 0:00:00.0 }
>>>f4  59. g8=Q  { Matt in 10/1 0:00:00.1 } f3  60. Qg4+  { Matt in 9/1 0:00:00.0 }
>>>Ke3  61. Ke5  { Matt in 8/1 0:00:00.1 } Ke2  62. Kd4  { Matt in 6/1 0:00:00.0 }
>>>Kf2  63. Kd3  { Matt in 4/1 0:00:00.1 } Kf1  64. Ke3  { Matt in 3/1 0:00:00.0 }
>>>f2  65. Kd3  { Matt in 2/1 0:00:00.0 } Ke1  66. Qe2+  { Matt in 1/1 0:00:00.1 }
>>>
>>>1-0
>>
>>
>>
>>OK, fine.
>>
>>So I see that the lastest fashion is to pit Tiger for Palm against the first
>>program you can grab, preferably with a 300 to 900 times hardware speed
>>handicap? :)
>>
>>Your athlon 1333 is approximately 900 times faster than your overclocked Palm.
>>
>>What's next? Drop the Athlon box on the Palm to see if it can stand the shock?
>>:) :) :)
>
>The software is also important and not only the hardware.
>I believe that 300-900 times hardware speed handicap is not enough if tiger play
>against the right program that is weak enough and I believe that tiger on the
>palm will have no problem to beat programs like Nero and that it can even beat
>Tscp.
>
>I guess that games against Faile may be interesting and it is not clear who is
>going to win.
>
>This is only a guess and I do not have the palm to test tiger for the palm.



Yes, you are right. On the other hand I think that letting Tiger for Palm play
against portable dedicated computer makes more sense. So people can decide if
the Palm is an interesting computer for chess or not...

On the other hand, if Tiger for Palm had won one of the games played by Peter,
it is true that it would have been a sensation. :)



    Christophe



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.