Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 00:20:17 04/23/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 23, 2002 at 02:49:53, José Carlos wrote:
>>These ratinglists are completely seperate (AFAIK), so we can't be sure one list
>>hasn't "drifted" up or down relative to the others.
>>
>>If a program scores worse in in bullet than in Blitz (against humans that is),
>>then I suspect the program has some sort of time management problem, for the
>>advantage over humans in bullet seems very large.
>>
>>-S.
>
> Sure, but nobody is speaking of perfect programs, nor perfect humans. Both
>have strong and weak points. There're many programs and, when we speak about
>programs, in general, all of them should count.
>
> José C.
You can always find an engine that behaves unexpected in some regard.
I don't know if Averno is a good representative of how programs behave in
bullet, I think the general tendency is quite the opposite.
Here is a snap from FICS:
Blitz Standard Lightning
1. LittleGoliat 2680 1. ChessTigress 2600 1. pecable 2805
2. ChessTigress 2657 2. LittleGoliat 2593 2. LittleGoliat 2803
3. pecable 2643 3. Gandalph 2586 3. Artificial 2794
4. DeepImpact 2642 4. ezcape 2580 4. baltica 2760
5. Koibito 2634 5. baltica 2556 5. Tartessos 2756
6. vippcomputer 2624 6. DeepThoughts 2547 6. JahnFeig 2749
7. Topas 2607 7. Hera 2530 7. Gandalph 2720
8. cchess 2587 8. Kec 2528 8. Gigabot 2714
9. Angledust 2569 9. JadeiteMech 2518 9. Obnoxious 2670
10. Artificial 2568 10. cchess 2506 10. JadeiteMech 2666
(Here Lightning is bullet and Blitz is lightning)
-S.
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.