Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:52:22 09/02/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2001 at 17:44:33, Chessfun wrote: >On September 02, 2001 at 17:30:33, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 02, 2001 at 14:56:45, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On September 02, 2001 at 08:59:43, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On September 02, 2001 at 07:59:22, stuart taylor wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 02, 2001 at 05:10:46, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 02, 2001 at 04:53:31, Steve Maughan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>IMHO, if it's tactics you're trying to spot then you should use: Fritz, Goliath, >>>>>>>ChessMaster possibly Nimzo. For positional analysis, Shredder, Junior 7 and >>>>>>>Tiger. For all round play I like Gambit Tiger and Junior 7. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Steve >>>>>> >>>>>>I believe that Deep Fritz is the best. >>>>>>I believe that Deep Fritz is the best in tactics except finding >>>>>>mates(chessmaster is the best in this task) >>>>>> >>>>>>I believe that Deep fritz is in similiar level to other engines in >>>>>>positional understanding and there are cases when it is better and >>>>>>cases when it is worse. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>>Uri, >>>>>So you don't agree about Golliath. >>>>> >>>>>And you say that Gambit Tiger is not exactly the very best in tactics alone or >>>>>in positional understanding alone, even if it will top the next ssdf list (i.e. >>>>>wins slightly more games)? >>>>>What then is the additional ingredient that (it seems) GT might have? >>>>>S.Taylor >>>> >>>>1)If gambittiger can top the ssdf then I may change my mind. >>> >>>Looking at it's current score v Junior 7 and Shredder 5.32 >>>it's totally possible it will top the next list. >>>But why should it's position relative to #1 or #2 on the SSDF >>>influence your opinion?. >> >>Data may influence my opinion. >>The difference between the first place and the second place may be also >>important for my opinion. > >The current difference is 3 rating points. >I don't see how a gain of 4 points for Gambit could influence >an opinion. 1)By this logic a gain of 400 elo also cannot influence my opinion because I can look at a gain of 400 elo as 100 gains of 4 elo when no gain of 4 elo can influence my opinion. 2)may influence my opinion does not mean that I am going to change my mind completely. If I evaluate that the probabilty for event A is 51% then a gain of 4 elo may change my opinion when I give only 49.7% for event A. If more than 50% for A means that I believe in A and less than 50% means that I do not believe in A then the change is from believing in A to not believing in A. Even if I cahnge my mind about the probability of A from 99% to 98% I can say that I am less sure about A so my opinion is not exactly the same after getting more information. > >>>>2)I believe that one of the advantages of gambittiger relative to >>>>Deep Fritz is better time management. >>> >>>Please explain as this is something I always felt opposite about. >>> >>>Sarah. >> >>2 reasons: >>1)I know that Deep Fritz has a tendency to play faster when it gets a big >>advantage and I believe it is not a good descision. > >When it gets a big advantage? do you have examples >of where this has caused it to lose or draw?. > >>I remember a game that was posted here(If I remember correctly by sune larson) >>and in that game Deep Fritz lost when I found that it did a mistake because of >>bad time management. > >Agh never saw that post. >I'll email Sune for the game. > >>The game was based on the opening from the game insomniac-shredder in the last >>ICC tournament. > >>I believe that the decision of Fritz to play faster when it has advantage is >>a compromise of Fritz's programmers in order to make the customers more happy. > >That hardly makes sense to me, and I doubt that making the program >play faster knowing that would affect it's result would cause a programmer >to do that. > >>I can explain it. >>I believe that Deep Fritz cannot earn more than 5 elo points from not playing >>faster when it gets a clear advantage. >> >>I believe that customers may become angry when they see a program calculates for >>a long time in a clearly winning position. > >But as you say if all others are doing so why worry about it. Other usually do not play faster when they have the advantage so I can understand that from customers point of view it may be an advantage for Fritz but I think that this option should be only one option of Deep Fritz when the best option should be not play faster when you have an advantage. I can understand that the programmers of Fritz want to see more games of Deep Fritz so it is logical at least in test games to tell Deep Fritz to play faster When it has a winning advantage. The result of the game is changed only in small part of the games and it is easy to find these small number of games when the programmer can see more games. > >>It is not only for human-computer games but also for engine-engine games >>because if engine-engine games takes more time the customers can see less games. > >Again I can't see the reasoning when and if, Deep Fritz was the only >program of the two playing faster. one engine that is playing faster in good positions may be enough to save 10% of the time in engine-engine game. 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.