Author: Harald Faber
Date: 07:43:59 07/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 2001 at 09:51:08, Chessfun wrote: >On July 24, 2001 at 01:14:39, Harald Faber wrote: > >>On July 23, 2001 at 17:25:55, G. R. Morton wrote: >> >>>I seem to have mixed impressions from some of the Info I've read. Opinions? >>>Thanks in advance. >> >>SSDF *pretends* that GambitTiger 2 is stronger, > >They don't "pretend" their results and others suggest it is so. This is twisting words, you know what I meant. > but see that they test >>ChessTiger 14 in the Chessbase-version > >As I recall from beta testing this was Christophe's idea. I know. >which has NO ADJUSTED opening book in >>opposite to the Chesspartner-version. > >While it may not have an adjusted book it has a better book learner. But it takes some games so that learning works. > And the difference between them in SSDF is >>marginal, > >That is true, as it also likely is, if you compute the ratings from your games. Sure, never meant anythng else. > so, in spite of less games I think that my tourney says more the >>"truth" > >huh, did I miss something. You play a few games and that says more of >the truth. This dispite the fact that you previously posted that if you >played more games you would likely get totally different results. Please read carefully. I *probably* get different results if I'd replay the games. BUT it also might be possible that I get the same percentage result after 500 games as I did after 10 games. I might get a 6-4 after 10 games. 10 more games give a 4-6, but after 500 games it steps back to 300-200. And BTW, if you'd take a look at the games, you'd see what is/was going on on the board. >than SSDF because in my comparison both Tigers play the same opponents >>(did they in SSDF? I don't think so) > >Again as you have yourself said, the limited number of games your playing >leads even you to believe that with more games you would have totally different >results. So the fact your playing the same opponents is meaningless. For you, not for me. It is one important point for real comparison. The only condition for a 100% comparison I couldn't realize is that I am not able to replay the same openings with the autoplayers. The ONLY way to *compare* two programs is to play the same opponents with the same openings. Part two is what is not fulfilled in my tourney. But I don't mind, I see enough. And all what is written in the 5 lines above is NOT the issue of SSDF. > and both are the Chesspasrtner-versions >>WITH ADJUSTED opening books. > >As you seem to take issue in other posts with learning, are you re-setting >Tigers CP learning after each match? If not then why take issue of others >not doing so?. >Sarah. Sure I reset ALL learning, otherwise it wouldn't make any sense because I would favour one side.
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.