Author: Peter Herttrich
Date: 04:31:58 04/17/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 1998 at 12:45:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 14, 1998 at 12:17:10, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>I don't think we have to endlessly debate >>if A or B can beat by doing XYZ. >> >>We have Fritz and Nimzo. Both 2 very fast programs. Both 2 very strong >>programs. Why is CSTal able to stand them although it is slow, big, does >>not fit in the first-level-cache, does not profit from hashtables, makes >>3500 NPS. >> >>IF fritz and nimzo are really the new way, why is the slowest >>comnmercial chess program succesful against them ?! > >could be anything. IE what about the case you mentioned a few months >ago with Crafty vs CSTal? Crafty wins most games, you said. And I'd >bet that against Fritz, Crafty will score < 50% most of the time. SO >a case of A beats B, B beats C, C beats A simply shows there is no >"transitivity" in chess. :) > Bob, for u the little info: Crafty 14.13 and 15.2 had played 7 Games against Fritz5 here. The 1. one Crafty was killed, but this was a misfit of Crafty and it will not do this twice (thanks learning). The next 5 Games were all draws ! And the 7. game Fritz was killed by Crafty. Both machines have 64MByte RAM, 200MHzK6. Fritz had 50MB hash, Crafty 48MB hash. So i think, the conditions are the same. Your 50% bet seems to be right. Peter
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.