Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:17:43 06/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 2002 at 07:51:24, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On June 14, 2002 at 06:09:53, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On June 14, 2002 at 04:24:23, Bas Hamstra wrote: >> >>>On June 13, 2002 at 19:57:43, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On June 13, 2002 at 17:49:26, Bas Hamstra wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 13, 2002 at 17:12:06, Peter Berger wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 13, 2002 at 16:01:37, Bas Hamstra wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Of course there are a lot. Differences between stronger engines are very small, >>>>>>>see Leiden 2002. TheKing had slightly outdated hardware, and bang, it sinks to >>>>>>>the middle of the field. And numbers 1 and 2 in Leiden ran at significantly >>>>>>>faster hardware than the rest, coincidence? Give a strong amateur 2x time >>>>>>>advantage and the pro's will lose the last bit of advantage they have. Not many >>>>>>>amateurs can beat TigerPalm? Are you kidding? How about 30? Heck, in Leiden >>>>>>>Comet rolled 3 pro's up in a ball while NOT being on faster hardware: GT and >>>>>>>TheKing and Shredder :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Best regards, >>>>>>>Bas. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri is usually very careful with his wording ;). He said that there are few >>>>>>programs that can play on a 486 computer and beat Chess Tiger on the Palm. >>>>>> >>>>>>Afaik there aren't 30 amateurs who could do that, or do you disagree? >>>>>> >>>>>>Kind regards, >>>>>>Peter >>>>> >>>>>Well, let's say 20, and then I can list em for you :-) >>>>> >>>>>Yace, Crafty, Ferret, Callisto, Nightmare, SpiderChess, Monsoon, Bringer, >>>>>Nejmet, Tao, Insomniac, Comet, Patzer, Xinix, IsiChess, Anmon, GLC, Quark, >>>>>Queen, Amy, Amyan, Pharaon, Pepito. I am sure I forgot a few. >>>>> >>>>>Best regards, >>>>>Bas. >>> >>> >>>>I think that you overestimate the amateurs. >>>>I do not expect Nejmet on 486 to beat palm tiger. >>>>486 is about 3-5 times faster than the palm if I remember correctly but I am >not sure if I remember correctly the speed difference. >>>>I guess that tiger is about 5 times better than Nejmet and it means that if you >>>>give Nejmet hardware that is 5 times faster than Tiger the results may be >equal. >>> >>>We have had similar discussions about strength/hardware. I say top programs are >>>nowhere against a 4x faster stronger amateur. You say this is only worth 100-140 >>>ssdf ELO, not enough to compensate. I don't believe the 50-70 is a law of nature >>>that you can use to predict outcomes at totally different time controls. At >>>blitz it is probably more than 70, ditto for slow hardware. And even if we >>>agreed on the 70 extra ELO for 2x speed it remains to be seen if THUS 4x speed >>>means 140 ELO. In other words, I think your calculations are as good as >>>worthless. >>> >>>The pro's are *very* good, almost good enough to compensate for a factor 2. But >>>believe me, there it stops. >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Bas. >> >>If you are right then this means that the pro's are not very good and have not >>a big advantage relative to the amatuers. > >It *is* very good to outsearch the competition nearly a ply, other things equal. >I don't know why you do not appreciate that. You think it's easy to get there? I expect the difference between professional and amatuers to be bigger. Kasparov is going to beat every player that is not a GM when you give kasparov half of the time or every 2 no GM players in a simultan. You should understand that when the difference between my program and the best amatuers is more than factor of 2 I do not consider factor of 2 as a lot. 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.