Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 22:06:43 04/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 04, 2002 at 16:21:46, Bertil Eklund wrote: >On April 04, 2002 at 14:10:51, Sandro Necchi wrote: > >>On April 04, 2002 at 06:53:15, Sandro Necchi wrote: >> >>>On April 03, 2002 at 14:26:11, Bertil Eklund wrote: >>> >>>>On April 03, 2002 at 01:13:31, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 01, 2002 at 02:03:15, Chessfun wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 01, 2002 at 01:55:29, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On March 31, 2002 at 16:46:42, liam hearns wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>thanks in advance! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I did not have time enough to test it very much >>>>>> >>>>>>>, but I got the impression it is about 15 to 20 points stronger than 6.0 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>April fool ?. >> >>Lack of fantasy? >> >>>>>> >>>>>>Sarah. >>>>> >>>>>Well, believe it or not after seeing/analysing something like 20000 computer >>>>>games and even more human games in more than 20 years and knowing most of the >>>>>programs which have been available and very many experimenthal verions that have >>>>>been made since 1976 I usually able to see if a program is stronger and how much >>>>>in a few games. >>>>>This is because I know what they do not know and what they and when their >>>>>evaluation is wrong and why. >>>>>However before stating something I prefer to have test games results also. >>>>> >>>>>Maybe I will not be able to do it in the future, but so far I was able to. >>>>> >>>>>Sandro >>>> >>>>Hi! >>>> >>>>I am sorry but it is absolutely impossible to notice 15-20 elo points >>>>differences between two programs without several houndred games, maybee if one >>>>version is x% faster than the previuous (without any other changess) >>>> >>>>We see this all the time here when GMs and other "experts" judge a program after >>>> one or two games. >> >>Of course I do not mean that I check some auto232 games and by looking the >>played moves I can do what I ment. >> >>I look the new program version while is playing, the evaluations, the moves >>which are considered and how long it takes to play the correct move. >>How is trying to solve the problems of the various positions and how it is able >>to take the advantage of the opportunity that are available in the games. >>By comparing this with the previous version it is possible to know if some >>improvements have been made and how much this should be worth. >>Also if it is not able to find a solution to some problems etc... >>Of course all this based also on more than 20 years experience in this field. >> >>I hope now people can understand (if they are willing to). > > I hope you are right but it is easy to go wrong when you "want" a new version >"to be better". I have 140000 computer-games in my database and I guess that I >have played about 20-25 % of the games with my own computers (since 1978) and my >first impressions are sometimes wrong because it is not always easy to be fully >objective when you have heard this or that of the programs. Yes, I agree with you. This is a very realistic thing. This is why I use the experience I made checking and looking so many computer programs in more than 20 years. It is a matter of experience. For your info just before the last year tournament I was told that according to test games the new version should have been 80 points stronger. I used my usual system and I came back saying the I did not agree and I insisted quite a lot to improve specific things as I was worry to loose at least a game due to problems with the passed pawn. The game against Junior whowed that I was right. Here you see that I trust what I see, not what people tell me! This is just an example, but I could write a book of examples... Ciao and take care Sandro > >Bertil
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.