Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:36:30 08/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 28, 2001 at 13:03:18, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On August 28, 2001 at 12:32:05, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 28, 2001 at 09:43:14, Alberto Rezza wrote: >> >>>On August 28, 2001 at 00:20:55, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>> >>>>You've got to be KIDDING me. Do you honestly think I'm posting because I think >>>>my stupid micro program is better than DB?? And how do you figure that I'm >>>>finding fault with DB >>> >>>Your SMP ( = Stupid Micro Program :^) ) might well be better than DB. One can't >>>equate speed with quality, as Bob does. You could take, say, MacHack (was that >>>the name?), or an even older program, and implement it in hardware at 10G n/s. >>>It would beat Junior and the rest, but I would hardly say it is a better program >>>than Junior. >> >>I doubt if a really stupid program can beat Junior and the rest even at 10G n/s >> >>I believe that a program with the exact evaluation function as tscp is going to > >TSCP isn't my only program. > >-Tom I know it. I did not say it about stobor and I guess that stobor is going to beat everything at 2 hours/40 moves if it can search only 1G n/s against 2M nodes of seconds of Fritz or Junior. I do not have stobor and it is only a guess. I simply responded to the poster who claimed that a very old program like machack or an even older program can beat the top program of today with 10G n/s. machack played already in 1967(see page 64 of how computers play chess) and I guess that the evaluation of machack or at least the evaluation of older program than machack is not better than tscp. Sorry if someone got the wrong impression from my post. It was not what I meant. Uri
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.