Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:22:15 09/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 2002 at 13:03:57, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On September 13, 2002 at 12:54:28, Uri Blass wrote: > >>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 > >You're sure about that? I think he probably just tried it 10+ years ago then >forgot about it :-) > >Dave Forgetting and not knowing is the same for me. 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.