Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Testmethods for n=0, n=1 and n=>800 - For Beginners and 'old Hands'

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 09:54:28 09/13/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 13, 2002 at 12:43:36, Dave Gomboc wrote:

>On September 13, 2002 at 11:54:04, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:31:10, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>
>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:17:20, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:16:07, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 11:06:57, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 10:56:10, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On September 13, 2002 at 10:38:17, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I disagree.
>>>>>>>>>Most of the population of chess programs is clearly weaker than the top
>>>>>>>>>programs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Gnuchess is losing against crafty even if you give gnuchess hardware that is 10
>>>>>>>>>times faster if the time control is slow enough and gnuchess is not a weak
>>>>>>>>>program but at the level of the average amateur.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I agree. This was chapter one though. Seems fair enough that GNU which has no
>>>>>>>>clue about endgames, tablebases, not even GM books, and then being amateur, is
>>>>>>>>weaker than Crafty. Was GNU ever tuned on Crafty? I mean if I would take GNU as
>>>>>>>>a pro I would make at least 8th place in SSDF out of it. But actually we are
>>>>>>>>comparing apples and beans. GNU is not of "this" world now. BTW I played
>>>>>>>>SIBIRIAN, for that nice prog I promissed you the same! Implement all the modern
>>>>>>>>stuff and it will play billy bully with FRITZ, I suppose. Not even needing
>>>>>>>>tablebases. Cough.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Rolf Tueschen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have to disagree again.
>>>>>>>I do not know how the book of gnuchess was build but it is not so bad and it has
>>>>>>>a lot of variety.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I do not think that gnu lose games because of book.
>>>>>>>Tablebases are also not very important.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Gnu is going to lose also against list inspite of the fact that list has no book
>>>>>>>and not because of tablebases advantage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Gnu need better search rules and better evaluation in order to be in the same
>>>>>>>level of the top programs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Again I must agree. Since all modern progs are founded on these free (?) sources
>>>>>>by defintion they are stronger. How could they be weaker? That is the same with
>>>>>>the pro's which were all founded in parts on CRAFTY. How could CRAFTY still be
>>>>>>stronger?
>>>>>
>>>>>The pro are not based on crafty and crafty clearly has knowledge that most pro
>>>>>do not have.
>>>
>>>To specify this I have to change it into "all new and working ideas" in Crafty
>>>have been noted by the pros and they will surely have found a way to implement
>>>the idea into their own prog. I didn't mean that thy simply copied the code,
>>>which could be understood because I wrote "free sources". What I meant was ideas
>>>that could be examined because they were published in public. Please correct me
>>>if that is impossible for reasons unknown to me. Also I din't mean that the pros
>>>were just waiting for news spreading out of Bob's working kitchen. Of course
>>>they make their own inventions too. At least I think so.
>>>
>>>Rolf Tueschen
>>
>>I know that at least part of the pro did not do it.
>>I know that Ed only in the last Rebel reinvented the internal iterative
>>deepening.
>>
>>He was surprised to find that this idea is used in crafty.
>>
>>He looked at the comments in the crafty code some years ago but he missed
>>the comment about internal iterative deepening.
>>
>>He did not look at the crafty source code later based on my knowledge.
>>
>>I know that other programmers also did not learn the ideas in the crafty
>>code.
>>I think that the main problem is to understand it.
>>
>>It is not easy to understand the crafty code and programmers prefer to use their
>>time to try their ideas instead of trying to understand the crafty code.
>>
>>Uri
>
>
>Ed's IID is different than traditional IID, though.
>
>Dave

Yes but the point is that Ed did not know about the IID idea when he invented
it.

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.