Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess Tiger versus Gulko

Author: Jonas Cohonas

Date: 13:27:02 03/20/02

Go up one level in this thread


On March 20, 2002 at 16:14:25, James T. Walker wrote:

>On March 20, 2002 at 16:01:24, pavel wrote:
>
>>On March 20, 2002 at 15:35:13, James T. Walker wrote:
>>
>>>On March 20, 2002 at 14:54:44, pavel wrote:
>>>
>>>>On March 20, 2002 at 13:07:55, James T. Walker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On March 20, 2002 at 10:26:08, Jonas Cohonas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On March 20, 2002 at 09:43:45, James T. Walker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On March 20, 2002 at 06:24:14, Steve Maughan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The version of HIARCS used is the new one - HIARCS 8, which may well be up with
>>>>>>>>the top engines.  It has been planned for release any time now.  According to
>>>>>>>>sources close to HIARCS the ChessBase company rates the new HIARCS engine second
>>>>>>>>only to Fritz 7.  We'll have to see but it has been a while since HIARCS 7.32
>>>>>>>>was launched (May 99) and Mark Uniacke could have made quite a bit of progress
>>>>>>>>in the last three years.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Steve
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>" ChessBase company rates the new HIARCS engine second only to Fritz 7."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That's interesting.  I didn't know that.  I think it's funny since I rate Fritz
>>>>>>>7 second only to Chess Tiger 14.0.  Never the less, I'm looking forward to the
>>>>>>>new Hiarcs.
>>>>>>>Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Chesstiger 14.0 is very strong, but all my testings and others i have seen too,
>>>>>>indicates that Fritz 7b is actually the strongest of the two.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards
>>>>>>Jonas
>>>>>
>>>>>Hello Jonas,
>>>>>You may be right but,  I believe most of the testing you are referring to was
>>>>>done on one computer with ponder off.  In my opinion the only thing you prove
>>>>>with this setup is which is stronger in this setup.  This setup is not a "real
>>>>>world" situation.  No programs actually compete this way except in these home
>>>>>test.  I am basically referring to "Blitz" time controls since that is where I
>>>>>have the most "experience".  In my database Chess Tiger 14.0 is still about 8
>>>>>points ahead of Fritz 7 and both have played 1300/1400 + games vs various
>>>>>opponents using two Athlon computers/auto232.  In my "Action" database which is
>>>>>mostly game/25 or game/30 minutes Chess Tiger is leading Fritz 7 by 19 ELO but I
>>>>>have less than 200 games each.  In my "Standard" database Fritz 7 is leading CT
>>>>>14 by more than 50 points but again I only have150/200 games each.  These
>>>>>databases where the number of games is low is very volatile since the next
>>>>>series of games by either program tends to change the rating by fairly large
>>>>>amounts.  Basically I'm leaving the "longer" time control testing up to SSDF
>>>>>since they can do much more than I can.  The bottom line for me is that they are
>>>>>so close that we may never know for sure which is strongest.  But it's OK for us
>>>>>to have different opinions and its understandable since we have different
>>>>>experiences.
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>Jim
>>>>
>>>>I have seen many test set up in many types of machine including blitz and
>>>>standard, in one or two machine and with ponder=on and off, in many rating
>>>>lists. I perticipate in all top ICS, (iregularly), and from the results on fritz
>>>>ICS server from several 100s opponents playing with several humdreds setups with
>>>>fritz7, I can only say fritz7 is better than shredder6 as well as it is than
>>>>chesstiger 14.
>>>>
>>>>this is a "fact".
>>>>
>>>>you might want to check up this thread.
>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?218204
>>>>
>>>>;)
>>>>
>>>>pavs
>>>
>>>I read it and see no proof that Fritz 7 is better than CT14.  It is certainly
>>>much better than Shredder 6 (any version) at blitz.  I believe my 1400 games on
>>>auto232 is more proof than you show.  It says there is only 7 points difference
>>>between CT14 and F7 at blitz.  Show me your 1400 games and I will compare.  All
>>>my games are on equal hardware (2 Athlon 1.4G machines) with ponder on.  Still
>>>as I said in the other post everyone is entinled to their opinion.  I just
>>>believe my opinion is based on more facts than others.
>>>Jim
>>
>>
>>I am not (not anymore, but used to) interested in  blitz games, so sorry to tell
>>you that I wont go through the trouble to test it. I was not only referring to
>>blitz but overall impression, even in blitz games perhaps your list (which I am
>>yet to see), is the only list I have heard of which has chesstiger better than
>>fritz7b.
>>
>>so do you have 1400 games between CT14 and Fritz7b (<-- this version I am
>>refferring to, not all the jumbled up version of fritz7)?
>>or 1400 games played seperatedly by CT14 and fritz7b
>>or list of 1400games were ct14 and fritz7b exists.
>>
>>which one?
>>
>>pavs
>
>Hello Pavs,
>My database (Blitz) consist of about 6000 games now.  Of that amout Fritz 7 has
>played abou 1425 games vs various opponents.  CT14 has played about 1350 games
>vs same opponents.  They have played against each other about 240 games which
>has CT14 leading by about 20 ELO in those 240 games.  In the overall database
>CT14 leads by only 8 ELO.  So as you can see that is my experience and it is
>really too close to call but I certainly see no reason to suspect that F7 is
>stronger than CT14.
>Jim

Program                          Elo    +   -   Games   Score   Av.Op.  Draws

  1 Fritz 7                        : 2677   18  18   993    61.9 %   2593   34.1
%
  2 Chess Tiger 14.0               : 2654   19  16   978    57.9 %   2599   38.3
%
  3 Deep Fritz                     : 2641   20  17   999    56.2 %   2598   33.4
%
  4 Gambit Tiger 2.0               : 2631   20  15   996    55.2 %   2595   39.9
%
  5 Junior 7                       : 2623   21  17   983    54.2 %   2594   31.7
%
  6 Deep Junior 7                  : 2598   16  22   992    49.8 %   2599   32.0
%
  7 Shredder 6                     : 2598   16  22   992    49.2 %   2603   32.4
%
  8 Hiarcs 7.32                    : 2572   16  20   996    45.8 %   2601   34.2
%
  9 GandalfUCI                     : 2553   50  52   145    42.4 %   2606   25.5
%
 10 Nimzo 8                        : 2544   17  19   987    41.4 %   2604   33.9
%
 11 Crafty 18.13                   : 2542   20  21   779    40.9 %   2606   32.3
%
 12 Crafty 18.12                   : 2532   37  38   228    38.2 %   2616   35.1
%
 13 Goliath Light 1.5              : 2527   27  25   544    38.5 %   2609   26.7
%
 14 gandalf_432h                   : 2518   47  43   184    37.5 %   2607   27.2
%

(1) Fritz 7                   : 993 (+445,=339,-209), 61.9 %

Chess Tiger 14.0              : 107 (+ 33,= 45,- 29), 51.9 %
Crafty 18.12                  :  23 (+  9,= 12,-  2), 65.2 %
Deep Fritz                    : 105 (+ 39,= 34,- 32), 53.3 %
Shredder 6                    : 124 (+ 65,= 40,- 19), 68.5 %
Deep Junior 7                 :  98 (+ 40,= 31,- 27), 56.6 %
Nimzo 8                       :  85 (+ 40,= 31,- 14), 65.3 %
Junior 7                      :  92 (+ 39,= 37,- 16), 62.5 %
Gambit Tiger 2.0              :  83 (+ 33,= 33,- 17), 59.6 %
Hiarcs 7.32                   :  80 (+ 42,= 24,- 14), 67.5 %
Crafty 18.13                  :  92 (+ 48,= 30,- 14), 68.5 %
Yace 0.99.56                  :  11 (+  4,=  2,-  5), 45.5 %
Nejmet 3.0                    :   3 (+  3,=  0,-  0), 100.0 %
Goliath Light 1.5             :  63 (+ 37,= 13,- 13), 69.0 %
gandalf_432h                  :  15 (+  8,=  3,-  4), 63.3 %
GandalfUCI                    :  12 (+  5,=  4,-  3), 58.3 %

Regards
Jonas



This page took 0.01 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.