Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 23:31:22 03/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Tanja There is nothing strange: You have still not played enough games. I give below an example of a match [40'/40] I had played some time ago over 100 games between Gandalf 4.32g and Program_X [I am a beta tester of X] to show what I mean: Gandalf 4.32g vs Program X Games 1-10 [win Gandalf] 3.0-7.0 (total 3.0-7.0) Games 11-20 [win Gandalf] 6.5-3.5 (total 9.5-10.5) Games 21-30 [draw] 5.0-5.0 (total 14.5-15.5) Games 31-40 [win program X] 3.5-6.5 (total 18.0-22.0) Games 41-50 [win program X] 4.5-5.5 (total 22.5-27.5) Games 51-60 [win program X] 3.0-7.0 (total 25.5-34.5) Games 61-70 [draw] 5.0-5.0 (total 30.5-39.5) Games 71-80 [win Gandalf] 8.0-2.0 (total 38.5-41.5) Games 81-90 [win Gandalf] 7.0-3.0 (total 45.5-44.5) Games 91-100 [win Gandalf] 5.5-4.5 (total 51.0-49.0) Can anybody tell me for sure which of the above two is the stronger program?? And what about if I had only played a 20 games match and these games would have been those played in rounds 71-90? Then, the result would have been 15.0-5.0 in favour of Gandalf 4.32g!! Imagine what some testers would have argued about the strenght of program X? For all these reasons I think that something concrete about the strength between two programs can only be said if 100, better 200-300 games or even more have been played. Kurt
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.