Author: Tanya Deborah
Date: 00:41:46 03/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 24, 2002 at 04:32:21, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 24, 2002 at 04:04:15, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On March 23, 2002 at 18:31:32, James T. Walker wrote: >>>Why? Because Chris himself told me this. Who knows more about CSTal than >>>Chris? Certainly not you. >> >>chris himself :-)) >> >>first: i don't think chris knows more about cstal than i do :-)) >>second: of course he began a complete rewrite. at was at the time >>when version 2.5 was there. >> >>i have no idea what purpl made out of it. >> >>what i wanted to say with WHY was: there is no need for a rewrite. >>the old and rusty algorithms from 1996 or 1997 are good enough for fritz7. > >I disagree > >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. > >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. > >> >>the difference between NPS between fritz7 and cstal1 (dos) is >>between 17-20 times. > >Nodes mean nothing for me. >Program can search more or less nodes if >you change the definition of nodes. > >> >> >> >>>>33.000 NPS is enough for fritz. >>>>Because Fritz is artificial stupidity. >> >>>And CSTal is artificial snail. It is interesting and fun to play and sometimes >>>plays brilliantly but against other computers like Fritz it gets out searched >>>and loses more often than not. >> >>how do you know that ? >> >> >>>I still think the first game loss was due to a >>>poor book. In the second game it had a better opening and played to a draw. >>>Two games tell you nothing. >> >>who tells you that i do only have 2 games ? >> >>>Don't know. I haven't tested it lately. Used to be 100+ ELO. Now maybe a >>>little less, maybe a little more. When I ran it on ICC it was constantly >>>100-200 below top commercial programs. This was on a K6-2-350 and later a >>>K6-3-450. >> >>maybe the other programs made a step backwards because they had to cope with >>king attacks and new paradigm. >>maybe the other programs made no real progress. >>ever tried fritz5.32 versus fritz7 ? > >Fritz7 is better than Fritz5.32 based on >all the rating list that I know. > >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. > >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? Hello Uri! In many games between Fritz7 and Fritz5.32 i could see that Fritz 7 have some problems playing against 5.32 version. Of course, i do not have enough games, and all the games that i tested was 30 blitz games.... Could you please tell more about the fritz 7 version with the long castling bug??? How i can see the bug in this engine?? Thanks. Tanya >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.