Author: Andreas Herrmann
Date: 10:01:49 08/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 23, 2001 at 08:13:02, Jouni Uski wrote: >On August 23, 2001 at 08:01:56, Jeff Lischer wrote: > >>On August 23, 2001 at 05:59:28, Andreas Herrmann wrote: >> >>>On August 23, 2001 at 00:20:20, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On August 22, 2001 at 21:35:14, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi there, >>>>> >>>>>my emperiment "Amateurs vs. Professionals" is now over (the right time, WM is >>>>>running ... good timing :-)) ). >>>>> >>>>>You can find all "AP" results in a table in my News Ticker. >>>>>You can find all 1.440 games in CBH and PGN and a rating list (all engines are >>>>>playing 180 games). >>>>> >>>>>I have a lot of fun with the AP tournaments, maybe I more fun if Gandalf won >>>>>more tourneys :-)) >>>>> >>>>>Amateurs vs. Professionals: >>>>>http://www.amateurschach.de/schach/cbase/experiment.htm >>>>> >>>>>All results available in my News Ticker: >>>>>http://www.amateurschach.de/news.htm >>>>> >>>>>... >>>>> >>>>>Have now a nice latest WM day. >>>>> >>>>>Best >>>>>Frank >>>> >>>>The result prove that the professionals are clearly better than the amatuers. >>>>The best amatuer Goliath Light got less points than the worse proffesional >>>>Nimzo8. >>>> >>>>It seems that in a tournament of 180 games the amatuers have no practical chance >>>>to win. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>Yes in 180 game tournaments (the statistical error is very low), but in a 9 game >>>tournament like the WMCCC 2001 there is nearby all possible. In Frank's test, >>>the amateurs wins 3 of 20 tournaments. In his tournaments Fritz is the strongest >>>engine, but it wins only 4 or 5 times. >>> >>>Andreas >> >>Also, Tiger was the 2nd strongest engine, but finished tied for 14th-15th in one >>tournament -- a tournament won by the 11th strongest SOS. Frank's experiment >>really highlights how *anything* can happen in short tournaments like WMCCC. >> > >But I have feeling, that with longer time control (as in Maastrich) surprises >are less likely. Frank's tournament was 40/10 I think. > >Jouni No, my opinion is, that the chance to get a halv or a full point against a stronger program is in longer time controls better for the weaker program. In blitz games programs reaches a depth of about 6 to 11 plys. In tournamnet games with for excample 40 moves in 120 minutes they reaches about 15 or more plys. If a weaker reaches about 1 ply less than the stronger one, it is more bad in blitz games. Excample: I was very surprized about the games from my program Holmes (without nullmove and pondering) at the IPCCC in Paderborn this year. I got for excample a halv point against Comet. In blitz games i have to play 50 or hundred games to get a draw against Comet. So my opinion is, shorter time controls are better for the stronger ones. I hope you understand my bad english. Andreas
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.