Author: James T. Walker
Date: 11:50:00 05/22/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 2001 at 13:39:22, Dann Corbit wrote: >On May 22, 2001 at 13:27:09, stuart taylor wrote: >[snip] >>Yes, Crafty is number 4, which I overlooked. Sorry! >>But I didn't overlook the comercial list. But that was very few games, which is >>good, but says very little. But you can't just bungle all the amatuer programs >>together with it to make CM8K to look so great overall. It's nowhere near the >>same category as tests against recent comercial programs. > >In what way? > >According to the last WMCCC, the world champion was Shredder. The runner up was >Ferret, an amateur program. > >In the previous CCT contest, in which several commercial programs particpated, >the winner was... >Crafty -- an amateur program. > >Look at the recent Leiden contest. Some amateur programs were near the top and >triumphed over some commercial entries. There used to be a large gap between >the amateur and commercial programs. I believe that the gap was mostly due to >superior opening books of the commercial programs. That gap has narrowed, as >the amateur entries now operate with sophisticated opening books. > >I believe that the gap between the strongest amateur programs and the strongest >commercial programs is very small. Of course, there is not enough empirical >data to back up my assertion, so it is only an opinion. What do you mean by "very small??" The latest SSDF list has Deep Fritz at 2650 after 470 games and Crafty 17.07 at 2487 after 857 games. What would constitute "enough empirical data??" On what empirical data do you base your "opinion?" Jim
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.