Author: James T. Walker
Date: 10:26:40 05/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 13, 2002 at 13:21:59, Terry McCracken wrote: >On May 13, 2002 at 11:45:13, James T. Walker wrote: > >>On May 13, 2002 at 11:35:58, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>On May 13, 2002 at 11:23:12, James T. Walker wrote: >>> >>>>On May 13, 2002 at 09:26:55, Chessfun wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>http://www.elhchess.demon.co.uk/ehss.htm >>>>> >>>>>.............BCF Elo.. Program >>>>> >>>>> 1 260 2686 Fritz7 >>>>> 2 259 2670 Hiarcs8 (236 games from many sources) >>>>> 3 257 2656 Gambit Tiger2.0 >>>>> 4 256 2653 Deep Fritz6 >>>>> 5 256 2652 Chess Tiger14 >>>>> 6 255 2640 Shredder6/632 >>>>> 7 253 2630 Junior7 >>>>> 8 253 2624 Gambit Tiger1.0 >>>>> 9 252 2623 Fritz6a >>>>>10 252 2617 Rebel Century4 (236 games) >>>>>11 250 2605 Rebel Tiger12.0 >>>>>12 250 2603 Junior6a >>>>>13 249 2599 Shredder5/532 >>>>>14 248 2587 Hiarcs732 >>>>>15 246 2574 Hiarcs 7.1 >>>>>16 246 2572 Nimzo8 >>>>>17 246 2568 Gandalf5 >>>>>18 245 2566 Nimzo 732 >>>>>19 245 2560 Fritz532 >>>>>20 244 2556 Chessmaster 6000/7000 >>>> >>>>I wonder if they have a different Hiarcs 8 program than I do?????? >>>>Jim >>> >>>No. However, these are human vs. computer games. >>> >>>Moreover, your comp. vs. comp. games, seems inconsistent to other comp. vs. >>>comp. games, and it makes wonder what are you doing that may have an adverse >>>effect with Hiarcs 8? >>> >>>Terry >> >>Hello Terry, >>First of all they are NOT all human/computer games. Many are comp/comp games. >>Second, I also would like to know what I'm doing to make Hiarcs 8 play so bad. >>However I have posted ALL games except for I belive 1 set and they are open for >>inspection/complaints/recommendations. Also most inconsistent result compared >>to mine are engine/engine games with ponder off. That in my opinion is a very >>questionable way to test engines. Of course if you are only trying to prove >>which engine is best with ponder off and each engine competing for cpu time on 1 >>cpu then that's fine. I just don't believe it's a real world situation. If you >>or anyone else can tell me what I'm doing wrong to cause Hiarcs 8 to play >>terrible I will be very happy! Just remember that I am occasionally switching >>computers and so when Hiarcs loses to Fritz by 8-4 on one computer it has also >>lost to Chess Tiger by 8.5-3.5 when using the computer that Fritz used before. >>Please inspect the games and tell me what is wrong with my setup or with Hiarcs >>8 program. >>Jim > >Jim I really don't know, I don't have enough data to formulate a conclusion. > >What concerns me is you have made statements that may indeed hurt the sales >of HIARCS 8 thus the programmer Mark Uniacke, however unintentional. > >Keep testing, but try long T/C's and very fast ones as well. Game 60' seems to >not do H8 any justice? Still I can't be certain it wouldn't do better over time? > >It's still just too early to form any conclusions about H8 at this time. > >Regardless, it is still a very strong engine, _apparently_ stronger than it's >predecessor H7.32, according to early tests on this board. > >I do suspect that H8 would benefit from very long T/C's on very fast hardware. > >However it would be nice if Mark Uniacke, would comment at this forum. It might >clarify some issues on H8? > >Terry Hello Terry, Thanks for your comments. I will shut up about Hiarcs 8 but the games speak for themselves. I will try some blitz games where others have posted good results but they were using one computer with ponder off. I don't believe this is a good test method because it is not a real situation that the programs would normally be used in. I believe the auto232 setup is best. Maybe I will get on the server and see if Hiarcs 8 does better on the server. Problem there is you don't know what hardware you are playing against. Jim
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.