Author: Aaron Tay
Date: 18:40:03 09/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2002 at 16:55:15, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On September 05, 2002 at 16:31:46, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 05, 2002 at 16:15:36, Bas Hamstra wrote: >> >>>On September 05, 2002 at 15:20:55, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On September 05, 2002 at 14:39:09, Roy Eassa wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 05, 2002 at 07:03:21, Joachim Rang wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 05, 2002 at 04:20:24, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Hmm... Yace still the strongest amateur!? Hasn't here been any progress in last >>>>>>>year really in the top? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Jouni >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Aristarch 4.4 will beat Yace ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>>I', not sure, if Aristarch is the stongest Amateur (I doubt it), but at least >>>>>>against Yace it's a bit stronger. I did several Matches between Yace and >>>>>>Aristarch 4.4 and all ended with a slightly advantage for Ari. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>"List" is not included in the above, either, and there's some evidence that it's >>>>>the strongest amateur program. >>>> >>>>I do not think that engine that does not know to ponder and does not have book >>>>is the strongest amateur program. >>>> >>>>Pondering and book is part of the program. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>Why not? What counts is the result you get. BTW my guess is Ruffian is on top. >>>At FICS it was in the (standard) top-20 at a lousy P2-300. That's amazing. I >>>would estimate Crafty would have at best 2100 at that hardware. Ruffian is over >>>2400. >>> >>>Bas. >> >>The point is that the result of list in Kurt unziker's tournament was achieved >>by a book that it not list's book. >> >>I have nothing against the tournament and I read Kurt's post but the >>consequence >>that there is evidence that list is the strongest amteur program >>seems to be wrong. >> >>Mogens larsen test List against the first division programs in fair >>condition(every program use it's book and 2 games) >>that means that list is using no book and list scored sligthly less than 50%. >I didn't know that, but that's still good if you think about it. The others are >pondering, List it not. Even if zero pondermoves are guessed right, the others >use 100% hardware when on move, List only 50%. Guessing 50% of the moves right >will only make it worse than a factor 2 time disadvantage. Er... I'm pretty sure Mogens Larsen tested with ponder off for both.After all that is what "fair conditions" mean. (Books not withstanding) I have done a few test games with Ponder off for both, the results are about 50%-60% depending on which engines are tested and time controls.. To be able to score 50% while the other guy is pondering and you are not is far too impressive to pull off, difficult (impossible?) even for top commericials.. >And it still scored >slightly less than 50%. You really start to wonder why he does not implement >that quick win, because if he does he is back in business, I think. Maybe because the score would remain about the same.. Aaron
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.