Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: new chessbits rating list

Author: Mogens Larsen

Date: 15:25:13 11/21/01

Go up one level in this thread


On November 21, 2001 at 18:03:21, Mike S. wrote:

>I don't think the list is worthless. IIRC, the hardware used isn't extremely
>different but in a reasonable bandwidth. And when programs and engines offer
>adjustable settings for people who like to experiment and to tune, why not
>include them in a rating list? I understand the critizism for combining results
>from different time controls, which is unusal to do... I assume that's just
>their way of offering a single complete list to the public. An "overall" list so
>to speak.
>
>There are some programs listed I don't know what they are exactly (i.e. Explorer
>or Challenger, I think these are Shredder 5 settings), but here I assume
>ChessBits readers will know more about those.
>
>Expecially interesting is that y13 engine, which seems to be a result of using
>that Che++ Nimzo language. This is something which was introduced with Nimzo 3.
>A kind of customizing chess language (similar to a programming language) with
>tremendous potential IMO. But it was more for the (very) advanced user; I didn't
>hear much about it except in the reviews after the release. So I think it's good
>that at least one of these creations appear in a rating list somewhere.

Basically, I have no problems with testing various alternate settings of
established engines as long as it helps the readers, ie. they don't have to
repeat the experiments to be sure or reach vastly different results. The problem
of this list (and others) becomes apparent when you create a list with 5-10
Shredder permutations, a handful of Tigers and other more or less random
collections. This obviously skews the list and makes any notions of
comparability obscure beyond "Geez, the Tigers are strong" quite difficult.
That's without taking timecontrol and hardware spectrum into consideration. The
list is worthless to me, but that obviously doesn't mean that it can't be a
stone tablet to someone else.

Regards,
Mogens



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.