Author: Uri Blass
Date: 11:01:14 03/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 11, 2002 at 13:46:58, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 11, 2002 at 13:25:33, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>That is the proof that software "counts" more than hardware for CC. >> >>w.b.r. >>Otello > >I do not see one game as a proof. > >It is clear that palm tiger is better than the weak amatuers but there are a lot >of amatuers that are better than palm tiger. > >If christophe wants to know he can release a free winboard program for the p.c >that is going to be called palm tiger simulator when the idea is that the engine >will be the same as palm tiger except the fact that it will be slower(he can >tell tiger to sleep after every new node that it generates) > >The palm simulator can be also limited in hash tables. >I am sure people will be happy to test it and give it a rating based on games >against other winboard engines. > >I guess that palm tiger is at similiar level to free winboard programs like >averno and if christophe release winboard version of palm tiger simulator we can >know better if my guess is right. > >Uri Maybe I am too optimistic about palm tiger because averno is only 410 elo points weaker than gandalf See the follwoing link that has list of rating for programs when averno has 2130 and gandalf has 2540. http://f11.parsimony.net/forum16635/messages/23352.htm I still guess that palm tiger is supposed to earn more from time relative to most of the mateurs thanks to better branching factor(inspite of the small hash tables) so I guess that if the time control is long enough palm tiger can compete with averno. Uri
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.