Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Back in time

Author: Lonnie Cook

Date: 15:52:16 08/30/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 30, 2001 at 15:47:11, Uri Blass wrote:

>On August 30, 2001 at 14:16:49, Joshua Lee wrote:
>
>>On August 30, 2001 at 08:50:52, Mark Young wrote:
>>
>>>It has been suggested here that programs have made little progress in the last
>>>10 years other then hardware speed. Here is the list of top programs 6 years
>>>ago. Does anyone really think a program of 4, 6 or 10 years ago running on
>>>modern but equal hardware would have a chance of beating a Junior 7, Deep Fritz,
>>>Chess Tiger in a match. I think someone is pulling our legs.
>>>
>>>If the suggestion that programs have not progressed much is correct, then we
>>>have been suckered by all programmers who offer us so called better and stronger
>>>version of their programs.
>>>
>>
>>The answer is yes, if you read the comments to the SSDF list they quote 79
>>points roughly per double
>>Take Rebel 7's 2416 on a pentium 90
>>which would be 2495 on a 200Mhz
>>and            2574 on the 450
>>and on the 1.2Ghz Athlon it will probably be more than 79points
>>
>>2653 equal to Gambit Tiger 2.0 on a 450
>>ofcourse GT2 according to their 79point theory on the 1.2 Ghz should be around
>>2732 which sounds silly  c'mon you really think any program on a 1.2 ghz athlon
>>would be able to beat Capablanca at his peak ?? Wake the hell up but that is
>>another argument...
>
>Do you suggest that kapablanca's best rating was 2732 of today?
>
>I believe kapablanca at his peak was clearly weaker than 2732.
>
>today players know more about chess then they knew in the past and I am even not
>sure if kapablanca with no more knowledge about opening and about the game could
>be a GM.

I totally agree, I think players of the past would be in for a rude awakening
playing some of these programs today.
>
>We have no way to use only results to compare rating of players of today with
>rating of players of the past.
>
>I also believe that 79 points per doubling is not correct and I expect old
>programs like Rebel7 to get less than 79 points from doubling the speed.
>
>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.