Author: Jeff Anderson
Date: 04:58:10 08/08/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 08, 1998 at 06:29:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 07, 1998 at 23:53:57, Jeff Anderson wrote: > >>On August 06, 1998 at 23:50:41, Danniel Corbit wrote: >> >>>On August 06, 1998 at 22:17:55, Jeff Anderson wrote: >>>[snip] >>>>Why not play anyone all if you weren't worried about your rating? >> >>>Totally pointless. >>>Will you enjoy playing against your 5 year old baby sister when you are 20? >>>If she wins it is by some strange accident. If she loses, you hurt her feelings >>>and got no enjoyment. Competition is only interesting when a contest is >>>involved. >> >> >>Crafty doesn't have feelings man. > > >No, but its "author" does. And looking thru hundreds of log files that are >nothing but crush after crush doesn't do much for making Crafty better. That >was the point... I believe that if you allowed Crafty to play any registered player with a rating over perhaps 1600 (currently it only playes with people whose ratings are over 2400 or so), you would find that after a given amount of time Crafty would have more losses that if it only played 2400+. I know this doesn't make sense statistically, or mathematically with the way the rating system works, but I have a pretty good feeling it would happen. Sure Crafties rating may drop dramatically, but if you are really just looking for losses, and weaknesses in the program, then it should not bother you too much. Perhaps one of the Crafty operators can try this with their clone, or you can try it yourself. Compare Crafty's # of losses during this time, with the average number of losses in the same time. I'm certain the # will be higher. Yes the ratio of wins to losses will be much better for Crafty during this test. But I believe the volume of games, and some flaws ICC would give you more losses that will help your make an even better Crafty. Jeff
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.