Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Why not comp. vs comp. with no book.

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 20:29:52 05/28/01

Go up one level in this thread


On May 28, 2001 at 21:42:57, Terry McCracken wrote:

>On May 28, 2001 at 19:42:37, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>Play 'em that way if you want to.
>>
>>Silly to remove 80% of a program's strength.
>>
>>But that's just my opinion.
>
>
>First Dan you don't decrease the engine strength one iota, you know that.

No but it does have an incredible impact on PROGRAM strength.

>This is to test the _engine_ not a combination of engine and book.

Then be my guest.

>Now I'll have to do some digging to find Alan Tomalty's article back in 1987
>or 88, of "Komputer Korner" fame, but he, a tester for many years recommended
>to turn off _book_ and pondering to test  'engine' strength in tournaments.

What about endgame tablebase files?  What about internal data files?
DarkThought has all tablebase files in ram, for example.

>It _is_ important to know the strength of an engine even before you add
>books, databases etc.

Not to me.  Maybe to others.  I just want to know how well it plays chess.

>Then you can optimize the whole programm, utilizing books and so on.

You can optimize the program any way that you want to.

>I concur with Alan Tomalty's concept completely, if you want to know engine
>strength alone.

Then test that way.  Makes no difference to me how others do it.  I think it
foolish for them to try an impose their will on me, however.



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.