Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:16:02 04/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 09, 2002 at 18:15:18, Will Singleton wrote: >On April 09, 2002 at 10:08:18, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>On April 09, 2002 at 09:31:49, Will Singleton wrote: >> >>>On April 08, 2002 at 23:14:40, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>On April 08, 2002 at 21:25:46, Will Singleton wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 08, 2002 at 20:54:35, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 08, 2002 at 20:23:57, Will Singleton wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Wow, ugly game. I'm having a hard time understanding this, it seems illogical. >>>>>>>Are you playing many games, then selecting the one Sjeng loses? If so, how >>>>>>>many? >>>>>> >>>>>>I have played many games against other winboard programs such as Gaviota, >>>>>>Bestia, faile, Movei, and even against Novag Turqouise; but against Sjeng so far >>>>>>only three and the first one I did NOT included since I was using 12 MB default >>>>>>for my Celeron 433 Mhz and my Celeron only had 32 MB of memory up until >>>>>>yesterday when I decided to upgrade it to 128 MB. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I really don't have much time to test CTP 14.9 since like most of us I do have a >>>>>>job. And to answer your silly question, I don't select games, as a matter of >>>>>>fact I was as dubious as you are now, and before I had Chess Tiger for Palm I >>>>>>also was a disbeliever to even consider CTP to be close to being of an expert >>>>>>strength. The only reason why I continue to test CTP 14.9 is probably because I >>>>>>resemble you in a way, I'm still NOT too conviced that such a little Gizmo can >>>>>>accomplish so much against programs that are considered close to 2400 in >>>>>>strength, but the more I test this Little Beast, the more I have to accept the >>>>>>fact that it is amazinly strong. >>>>>> >>>>>>Pichard. >>>>> >>>>>Look, I appreciate that you test and post games. My question was prompted by >>>>>comparing your posted game with sjeng 12L, which seemed to avoid several poor >>>>>moves (though I must admit, it did play BxN with the fiachettoed bishop, then >>>>>went on to destroy its own kside). >>>>> >>>>>I don't think my question was silly at all. Had you posted your methodology, I >>>>>wouldn't have had to question you. It's a reasonable thing to ask. >>>>> >>>>>I don't believe CT for Palm is a strong program, simply due to its limited >>>>>search depth. >>>> >>>> >>>>You talk about methodology in your second paragraph. Good point. >>>> >>>>What methodology have you used to evaluate the search depth of Chess Tiger for >>>>Palm and to decide that it is "limited"? >>>> >>>>Do you have a Palm? Have you tested Chess Tiger for Palm? I can't find you in my >>>>customer's list. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Christophe >>>> >>>> >>> >>>I have been using and testing CT for Palm since you brought out 14.1 text-mode >>>(I believe that first version was fully functional, though I don't have it >>>anymore). I did a lot of testing with it, ran some epd test suites, played >>>games vs Palm Genius, played against my program, and played it some myself. CT >>>for Palm, imho, is certainly a very fine program. >>> >>>Common sense, as well as the testing I've done, says that CTpalm will search >>>less deeply than most amateur pc programs. That's what I meant by "limited" >>>search depth. The fact we're discussing it at all is a tremendous compliment to >>>CTpalm, and to your dedication and programming skill. I will shortly add myself >>>to your database, and recommend that others do so. :) >>> >>>Having said that, a few more comments. There has been some discussion in the >>>past regarding the playing strength of the Novag Sapphire II vs chess programs >>>on the Palm. I read a comment by the fellow who automated the Sapphire on fics, >>>who said that his account is routinely crushed by any reasonable pc program >>>running on a P166 or greater (Sapphire runs at 32mhz, I think). In testing >>>Sapphire vs CTpalm, he also reported CT was getting outsearched by a ply or so >>>in a few test games, and did not win any. Put those two observations together. >>>Now, admittedly that’s blitz, and standard time-control might be different. >>>However, you said yourself that CT should be about equal in strength to the >>>Sapphire, citing the Sapphire’s SSDF rating. You also said that the Sapphire >>>should be “wiped away” by any program running on a Strongarm at 100mhz. Put >>>those two observations together. Given these and other reported results here, >>>you can readily understand my scepticism at the Sjeng games. However, strange >>>things do happen. >>> >>>As for testing methodology, you're right that I haven't performed rigorous >>>tests. But that's tough to do, since all games have to be run manually, and at >>>standard time control (since, as you have said, CTpalm doesn't do well at >>>blitz). I think a serial interface between Winboard and Palm would be necessary >>>to perform reasonable testing. I'd be happy to write the pc side of the >>>interface. I guess that would require you to add some interface code on the >>>Palm side, or perhaps you already have an interface. >>> >>>I enjoy CT for Palm, as I do other programs. And I like to test them, >>>especially against mine. CT can do very well, no doubt about it. But, let’s >>>not get carried away and imply that it approaches amateur pc programs in >>>strength. >>> >>>Will >> >>Do you have an x86 or IBM Compatible version of your Amateur 1.5 chess program? >>I would be happy to play it vs Chess Tiger 14.9 one game per day at game in 60 >>Minutes or 40 moves in 40 minutes. Please email it to me and I shall start >>testing it starting today. >> >>Pichard. > > >Sounds like a plan. I'll have to convert it to run under winboard, and being a >mac programmer, it might take awhile. Actually, now that I recall, DC offered >to help me a few months back, so maybe it won't take so long. > >So, what about the bet? Christophe says that CT approaches the level of average >amateur progs, I assume without hardware limitation (hardware doesn't matter to >CT, but it matters to me). My prog is certainly no better than average, likely >worse. I looked at some rating lists of winboard programs and it seems that the average amatuer program(the program that half of the amatuers are weaker than it) is at least 300 elo worse than crafty. If I use definition of average rating I think that the average amatuer program is going to be even worse than 300 elo weqaker than Crafty. I do not know the level of your program but if your program is better than being 300 elo worse than crafty then it is better than the average amatuer program. 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.