Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 18:19:10 11/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 2001 at 18:46:35, Brian Richardson wrote: >I am somewhat frustrated. I made some changes to Tinker adding lazy eval and >some other terms and then tested several things. > >It improved nps speed by about 30%. > >It improved WAC results. > >It won or drew every self play game (blitz and standard). This sounds weird, how many did you play? A meaningful match is typically going to be well over 50 games, are you saying that the new version won or drew every game in such a match????? Or did you just play 2 or 3 games, in which case I'd say you were basically wasting your time. > >Then I put the new version up to play at ICC. >It promptly lost 100 points in blitz and standard !? ICC ratings really move around alot as you know. I personally don't rely on them for much, but if I did I would be doing something such as: take the average rating over a series of 200 hundred games. I would NOT just rely on the rating AFTER 200 games. > >This is not the first time that my "enhancements" seemed to improve things but >turned out to play worse in actual games. > >Does this sort of thing happen to others too? in general, yes! > >Thanks >Brian
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.