Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: HLCC - 3 || Fritz 7 vs Hiarcs 8 || Game -5 (PGN) ||

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 00:59:54 06/02/02

Go up one level in this thread


On June 02, 2002 at 03:56:46, Uri Blass wrote:

>On June 01, 2002 at 19:54:20, stuart taylor wrote:
>
>>On June 01, 2002 at 19:36:36, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On June 01, 2002 at 18:05:10, stuart taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 31, 2002 at 18:27:58, Ron Langeveld wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On May 31, 2002 at 06:50:56, stuart taylor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>For me, the experiment is over. Hiarcs does not look especially great at higher
>>>>>>time controls. Even if it would win a match like this (although it is looking a
>>>>>>bit doubtful) it is clear that it does not excell at this time allowance.
>>>>>> Maybe at an hour per move it would, but the indications for that are also
>>>>>>nothing special, as this is not showing any movement in that direction either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So, in spite  of the one or two brilliances which Hiarcs 8.0 might be capable
>>>>>>of, as written about in Uniaks article, I don't know if I want to buy it for
>>>>>>that alone.
>>>>>>S.Taylor
>>>>>
>>>>>Too bad you are only looking at "statistics" from 5 (?) games instead of using
>>>>>your own knowledge of chess in order to evaluate what Hiarcs' strongpoints are.
>>>>>Imho it is not the tournament book, because that really sucks, so for starters
>>>>>it should have been replaced.
>>>>
>>>>With the results starting off like this, it is hard to believe that Hiarcs will
>>>>have atleast 75% wins over Fritz even after 1000 games.
>>>
>>>I could tell you it before the match.
>>>
>>>It is hard to believe that a top program that does not get at least 60% at blitz
>>>against the top programs can suddenly get more than 75% at long time control.
>>>
>>>I believe that there are programs that earn more from time but the difference is
>>>usually small unless there is a significant bug(for example a program that
>>>always lose on time or always search depth 1 at blitz and it is not the case
>>>with Hiarcs).
>>>
>>>I also see no reason to suspect that Hiarcs8 earns more from time before the
>>>match(unless you compare it with Hiarcs7.32 that had bugs for long time
>>>control).
>>>
>>>
>>>I think that as someone from Israel it is better if you ask the question if
>>>Junior,Genesis or Movei earn more from time relative to other engines.
>>>
>>>I suspect that Movei earns more from time than the english program monarch(both
>>>programs are free winboard programs) but I am not sure because I have not enough
>>>data to know.
>>>
>>>Both programs play in the 5th division and movei has 9.5/14 when monarch has
>>>7/14(movei beated monarch in the match between them 1.5-.5).
>>>
>>>I may get more data about the difference between them at 40/40 when the
>>>tournament is finished.
>>>
>>>It may be interesting if somebody can do a tournament with both programs at 1
>>>minute/40 moves(I suspect that Monarch is better at that time control but I have
>>>not enough data to be sure).
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>Yes, I DO ask all that.
>>I'm also interested to know which program is the Greatest at long times, or
>>correspondence, analyis, at all, not only relatively. "Relatively" might stop at
>>some stage.
>>Which ever it is, is a good pogram for everything, when Hardware gets much
>>faster.
>>(I don't get the Israeli chess magazine anymore. I used to get it a long time
>>ago. I didn't know about the freeware engines).
>>S.Taylor
>
>The israeli free programs are not mentioned in the israeli chess magazine
>
>Here is a link for the divisions:
>
>http://home.hccnet.nl/leo.dijksman/index.html
<snipped>
>Some comments:
>Both Movei and Monarch played in the 5th division and were promoted.

The second Israeli free engine is Genesis and I mentioned
Monarch only because of the comparison about earning from time.

I do not think that Movei earns more from time than Genesis.

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.