Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 03:24:34 03/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 24, 2002 at 04:32:21, Uri Blass wrote: >I disagree i know you would do so. >I did not test tal dos so I cannot be sure about it but even if the old >algorithms are good enough for Fritz7 then >it does not mean that they will be good enough for tiger15 or >for fritz8. right. it does not mean that. >Even if the old algorithm are good enough to get 60% against >the top programs(and I know no evidence that they are good enough >even to score 50%) then it does not mean that there is no need for >a rewrite in order to get 70% against them. right. >Nodes mean nothing for me. >Program can search more or less nodes if >you change the definition of nodes. right. >Fritz7 is better than Fritz5.32 based on >all the rating list that I know. right. >Fritz5.32 may score better in one short tournament but >I do not know about a serious tournament with 100 games >for every program when Fritz5.32 can score better. right. >Fritz7 got second place after the king in a tournament that >was published here and it is the version with the long castling >bug(7.002) >Do you believe that Fritz5.32 could get similiar results? i don't know. and i don't care. but i know shredder6 paderborn is stronger than fritz7. >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.