Author: José Carlos
Date: 07:47:41 11/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 05, 2001 at 09:57:01, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >On November 05, 2001 at 05:56:48, José Carlos wrote: > >>On November 05, 2001 at 03:40:36, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>the next big event and Fritz cann't win. >>>In the most magazines where I can read information about Fritz-Kramnik I must >>>read Fritz is the best program in the World. But our Fritz can not win the big >>>tourneys. >>> >>>A pity: >>>We have programs (I am to 70% sure) witch have a better chance against Kramnik >>>with longer time controls. >> >>>Chess Tiger ... >>>Shredder ... >> >> I don't like Fritz, and I agree with the above, but don't forget Fritz is >>number one in the SSDF list for a long time >> >>>Gandalf ... >> >> Aha! joking again, you're so funny... >> You'd better write 'Rebel' in your list. Rebel gets always good results in >>these events where programmers are involved. Also, Rebel has proved to be very >>good against humans: playing against them. >> Gandalf has won nothing, hasn't played humans, is not top in SSDF. Gandalf is >>just another strong program like Crafty, Phalanx, Yace... Very good, but not a >>top program at all. >> >>>and now the World must see Fritz (not the 4x computer chess world champion >>>Shredder), a program which cann't win the most of big computer chess events. >> >> This is true. Also the way Fritz was selected was unfair and, I'd say, stupid. >> >>>GM Keene say Fritz is the best program in the World. >>>Is GM Keene a grandmaster or have Keene tomatos on his eyes. >> >> Everyone can make a mistake. It remainds me of your claim about Gandalf. >> But it's not important what program anyone believes is the strongets in the >>world. There must be a competition, declare a winner, and that winner will be >>the strongest in the world until the next competition. This is the fair way to >>do it. Maybe not scientifically perfect, but fair in terms of competition. >> >>>What a pity ... >>> >>>But all this is not very important, the match Kramnik - Fritz is also boring if >>>I look in my computer chess kalendar with the results of the last years. >>> >>>Now Chess Tiger won the Dutch-ch 2001 and I will say ... Christiophe we all know >>>how strong is your program and I will say ... >>> >>>Congratulations >> >> I agree. >> >> José C. >> >>>Best >>>Frank >>> >>> >>>I wait of tourneys where Fritz can win. >>>So it is better for me to understand a grandmaster with the name "Keene". > >Hi, > >make analyses with longer time controls with all top programs. >You can see that the best analyses comes from Gandalf. 1. Best analysis is a subjective concept. 2. Is the match against Kramnik be a whose-analysis-are-better or a playing chess match? >In all test suites Gandalf have top results, Gandalf found the most of moves in >5-10 minutes on stronger hardware. Other programs in different position in 1 >second or not in 30 minutes :-)) Gandalf found moves not in 1 second he must >calculated and found the most critical moves in 5-10 minutes on very fast >hardware. Is the match against Kramnik be a problem-solving match or a playing chess match? >Look in the SSDF >Gandalf on 450MHz and Gandalf on 1.2GHz. If I had to trust SSDF, then I'd have to admit Fritz is #1. >And now look in your analyses with 10 minutes and you can see what I say now a >long time. > >For me is Gandalf with longer time controls one of the best chess programs. Also >very strong is Shredder 5 and Junior 7, Chess Tiger 14.0 and Fritz. Yes, and GM Keene has a subjective opinion too. >Or better look in my tourney: >Amateurs vs. Professionals with 40 in 10 and you see that Fritz is clear >stronger then all others. Now look in the results from my CCE tourney and you >can see the different to the others is not to hight. Number of games please. Error bars? And more: I can't see how those games are made. What I can see is public tounaments. I trust what I see, not what anyone does at home. If I want, I can show you only games Averno has won in my tests. That'd be a impressive performance. >And if you now look in long time analyses I will see what you write about >Gandalf, the program of the future. The problem is the endgame, here are other >top programs better. About the 'program of the future': subjective. About endgame: do you believe the match against Kramnik will be a mid-game-only tournament? >I hope Steen made Gandalf stronger. > >Is Gandalf 5 50 ELO stronger as Gandalf 4, so Gandalf is at the moment on According to what? Can you give number of games and error bars of those estimates? Athlon >1.4 and tournament time the strongest program and for sure is version 4 with >Shredder the strongest program for long time analyses. I have here clear the >best results with Shredder and Gandalf. > >Believe me, I can used x computers for an test and I used x computer. >I know what I say ... I don't understand this last sentence. Please explain. >Best >Frank José C.
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.