Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Thueringen, some info

Author: Harald Faber

Date: 22:04:46 11/18/01

Go up one level in this thread


On November 18, 2001 at 17:41:22, Thorsten Czub wrote:

>On November 18, 2001 at 14:20:58, Harald Faber wrote:
>>No, it was just 9 rounds, almost anything is possible.
>
>nonsense. the explanation must be in the games, or the machines.
>or the settings the humans set up.

Sure the explanation is in the games. :)

>do we have information about the hardware that was used and about the settings
>of openings and style ?

Hardware:
Gandalf 4.32 UCI - AMD Athlon 1200 MHz
Junior 7.0 - AMD Athlon       1400 MHz
Hiarcs 7.32 - AMD 1900+       1600 MHz
Gambit Tiger - AMD 1800+      1610 MHz
Chessmaster 8777 - AMD        1563 MHz
Shredder 5.0 - AMD            1500 MHz
Fritz 7.0 - AMD               1500 MHz
LambChop 10.87 - AMD          1000 MHz
Rebel Century - AMD XP 1600+  1333 MHz
Nimzo 8 - AMD                 1000 MHz

Hash size has been around 184-200MB IIRC except Rebel who only had 256MB RAM and
under Win2000 200MB hash made Rebel much slower so I took only 100MB hash which
have been filled within 2 minutes. Might have hurt in some endgame.

>>Nimzo IS weak, Rebel played...not well.
>
>nonsense. nimzo8 was never weak. the versions before where shit.
>but 8 is ok, for the first time since nimzo guernica this nimzo version was a
>real progress. why do you say it is weak when it isn't.

Because it IS weak. Plays weak moves and is the worst endgame player between the
commercial programs.

>>Slowest machine was A-1000 for Nimzo
>
>aha. NIMZO is weak. it seems to me the hardware of nimzo was weaker than the
>hardware the others used. what else was with nimzo. setting ? opening book?
>tablebases ? hash ?

There have been other PCs which were not significant faster, e.g. the 1200 for
Gandalf. Also Rebel with XP1600+ is only 1333MHz in real.
Nimzo used the default settings like many other programs. Only addition:
TablkeBase depth set to 10 (default is 6) to get Nimzo faster to the TBs before
he loses by bad endgame. Opening book default, complete TBs and around 180-200MB
hash.

>>Some used own and/or "tuned" opening books,
>
>aha. nimzo is weak !! now we come closer to the reasons.

Yes, the reason is the engine.

>> some used the original ones.
>
>some did, some not. WHO ?

I am not sure.
GT2 aggressive of course played with a special book by Jeroen Noomen like Rebel
did. Junior 7 had some tuned book, edited and modified by Ludwig Bürgin
(operator of Junior7) in many hours of work. And the last tuned opening bbok has
been Chessmaster. Longin Bauer had some special books, one for each opponent and
for each colour. All others have played with the original engine books AFAIK.

>>Settings have been default except Chessmaster which have been by Stefan Kleinert
>
>despite opening books you mean.

Special opening books for CM, read above.

>>(CM 8777). Shredder 5 played the last few rounds with "normal" (default is
>>aggressive). The others played default. Time control in most cases has been
>>40/120+60.
>
>hm.-
>
>thank you harald.

After the first three rounds=three losses where I have played 40/120 and changed
to g/65 after 40 moves I changed to g/180 which gave better results (the loss
vs. Tiger is normal, best result Rebel can expect vs. Tiger is draw) and didn't
lose a game since that change. One small reason is: After the change to g/65,
Rebel moved MUCH too fast, after 30-60sec each move. Vs. Junior the game was
lost after 40 moves anyway, but I am not sure about the games 2+3 vs. CM8777 and
Hiarcs.



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.