Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 01:49:50 11/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 24, 2001 at 22:48:50, Chessfun wrote: >I thought that post might tempt you out of your shell Mogens :-), you haven't >posted much of late?. True. And to avoid a lot of controversy on an unimportant topic I'll stop here as well. >Actually, it's rather difficult to separate the results of the versions and I >only did so, specifically in my lightning lists. Although I do have the ability >to recalibrate based on the Fritz version numbers for my normal rating list and >have been considering doing it. > >As we all know the SSDF assuming they have installed all the patches as times >went by, must have used a, b and c to produce the results called 6a. If they >haven't and are in fact still using the "a" version then maybe they should test >the "c" version seperately as my own testing indicates this is stronger. It would be interesting to know what version they're using. But I assume it's the first patch, since it's calibrated very well. >All that aside, whether we like it or not the versions of Fritz 6 while maybe >not being major revisions are different. They produce different results in >testsuites and in engine matches. This IMO seems somewhat like Crafty where >different versions are regularly coming out with minor revision. That again is not an argument for adding all. Just as you don't have 10-20 Crafty's on the list. And I also wonder about Fritz 5.32. Quite a few different versions, at least in size, have been produced. It would be more sensible to use the same engines as in the standard rating list. At least some kind of comparison should be possible. And why is 6a and 6b not represented on the rating list? >I'm not so sure that customers would have felt cheated as my results indicate >that the latest version c is the strongest. And were it released last year as >Fritz 7 it would have produced better results than the "a" and "b" versions. Only marginally as your own standard rating list suggest, so I doubt the chances for reckless enthusiasm. >I don't see why or how removing the results of CMFun makes the list either >unfair or uninteresting?, but I'm sure you'll elaborate.;-) I referred to your method of avoiding modifcations, not CMFun in particular. However, allowing mulitiple versions of some engines for subjective reasons yields an unfair and skewed list. That is a fact. Whether it is uninteresting or not is up to the reader. 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.