Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 11:09:37 05/25/98
Hi All: No matter how much prejudiced or biased against Fritz 5 Thorsten is or seem to be, no matter how much "emotional" his statements appears for the scientifically minded people here, no matter his style, - a good worded one, to be sure, I say as a pro- - etc, etc, it is clear he has a point with respect to the way programs are measured. It is just not fair running programs in different platforms, that's all. And he has given a proof of that. We all know what a lot of difference the speed has even for not fast searcher programs. Probably all people here has had the same experience than me: until 386 platforms I was capable of getting systematic good results against top programs, but that score disappeared almost totally when I got a 486 and now with a Pentium 200 MMX I just get a draw in specially happy and bright days. And I am talking of the very same programs, not upgrades. So, if really there has been a systematioc practice to give a program a considerably faster platform, no doubt that the results should be taken with a grain of salt, foe saying the least. This is not to say Fritz 5 is weak: Is just to say that a shadow of suspicion -not over tester, but on the testing procedure- is cast over the entire SSDF list. Now in a more subjetive approach, I have felt, also, that Fritz is not that strong. I have posted before on that. Of course maybe his style is earsier for me to hold at bay, but nevertheless and although in the end I like it very much, my feeling is -feeling, yes- that there are at least 3 or 4 prorams stronger against human competition. But then, how to explain the results against human players of high level? Well, maybe that results are not too many. Enrique, how many games Fritz has played with draw or wins againts over than master level players? Fernando
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.