Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:02:17 11/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2001 at 08:35:31, Thomas Mayer wrote: >Hi Christophe, > >> Yes, that's right. >> There are 9 games posted on this link. >> The 3 games Thomas is talking about are the only ones Chess Tiger for Palm >> lost. >> Chess Tiger for Palm won all the other games! >> The right way to compute a rating would be to take the average rating of the >> opponents and to count a +6 =0 -3 victory of Chess Tiger for Palm against this >> virtual everage player. > >Well, Blikskottel has about 1750-1800 ELO and the used Golem version was around >1500 on those rating lists. I doubt that you would be very satisfied with the >rating we can calculate out of this... :) We can calculate no rating based on this information because we have not stable rating for the program that beated palm tiger. I also believe that tiger earn more from time relative to the weak programs so we can get no idea about the ssdf rating of palm tiger based on this information. >And I doubt that it would be fair to ChessTiger to calculate a rating out of >this - as I have said, I am quite sure that ChessTiger on Palm is around 2100. >As you have explained, your testing does show it's strength and I believe you, >of course. > >Anyway, where is the mistake ? >Another example: (To get away from ChessTiger - I love your products, it was not >my intension to offense you...) > >On the SSDF we have listed Fritz 5.0 with 2460 & Shredder 3 with 2417 on Pentium >200 MHz. >Well, for testing issues I use sometimes an old Pentium II 233 MHz to test my >own engine. Giving the better software the slower PC is interesting because >those better engines must win now because of positional factors and can not >outsearch my engine so easy. Well, but this PII/233 is now to slow, Quark >(current beta) scores clearly above 50% against Fritz 5 and Shredder 3 on >PII/233 when Quark runs on Athlon 1333... What should we conclude out of that ? >That Quark is over 2400 ??? I totally doubt that and I am quite happy that Quark >has reached maybe 2300 nowadays... Results of the computer chess tourneys and on >the winboard rating lists indicate that I am around 2300 ELO on the fast >Athlon... It is possible that quark(athlon) is better than 2400 against humans if you use fast hardware. I guess that it can be close to 2500 on good hardware. I do not know about the winboard lists but if they are based only on comp-comp games I do not see how they get the 2300 when Fritz5(p200 has more than 2400 ssdf rating). I doubt if Fritz6(p233) can get 2400 against humans because humans have it when they do not have quark. Humans can learn nemeth's tricks against Fritz(p233) but they cannot repeat the same trick against quark. But per consequence: Are Fritz 5 and Shredder 3 weaker then it's >rating on SSDF ? Where is the mistake ??? Or did they get weaker in the last >years ? Without being changed ? Is that possible ??? It is possible. It is possible that humans learned to play better and cristophe's test are based also on comp-comp games and not only on comp-human games. Uri
This page took 0.01 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.