Author: stuart taylor
Date: 16:06:41 06/02/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 2001 at 17:51:49, Graham Banks wrote: >On June 02, 2001 at 14:49:26, william penn wrote: > >>On June 02, 2001 at 10:53:56, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On June 02, 2001 at 03:01:41, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On June 01, 2001 at 10:18:54, stuart taylor wrote: >>>> >>>>>That will probably let CT down quite a few points. >>>>>For CM8000, it sounds much more impressive than some slightly winning results >>>>>against some much older program. >>>>>S.Taylor >>>> >>>>Losing 8-4 suggest that chessmaster is 133 points weaker then Tiger14. >>>> >>>>I do not see it as something impressive. >>>> >>>>Deep Fritz is 103 points better than Fritz5.32 on 450 mhz >>>>based on the ssdf list. >>>> >>>>Fritz5.32 is 3 elo better than Chessmaster6000 on 200 Mhz. >>>>It means that Deep Fritz is probably >>>>only 106 elo better than chessmaster6000. >>>> >>>>Tiger14 does not seem to be clearly better than Deep fritz >>>>so 133 elo weaker than Tiger14 is not more impressive than >>>>106 elo weaker than Deep Fritz. >>>> >>>>I am not going to be impressed if I discover that chessmaster8000 >>>>is only 20 elo weaker than chessmaster6000 and not >>>>200 elo weaker than chessmaster6000. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>On my own rating list which I'll soon post I have a difference >>>of 112 points between CT 14.0 and Chessmaster 8000. >>> >>>Sarah. >> >> which demonstrates how pitifully weak cm8000 is. > >I doubt whether many would consider a GM who was 112 ELO below Kasparov to be >pitifully weak compared to Kasparov! This indicates the exaggeration in your >statement. >Graham. The truth is that the Tigers are still not exactly G-D. But they are simply a healthy improvement, atleast for contemporary scoring purposses. S.Taylor
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.