Author: stuart taylor
Date: 16:20:20 10/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 02, 2002 at 16:55:35, Dann Corbit wrote: >On October 02, 2002 at 11:42:05, stuart taylor wrote: > >>On October 02, 2002 at 08:43:01, robert flesher wrote: >> >>>You have only played 3 games and that is not enough to draw a conclusion on! >>>Look at the results on this forum you will see tiger is plenty strong and >>>STRONGER that this new ruffian. Try the normal setting of Tiger as Christophe >>>states it is the strongest. Better yet post some game in which you beat it! Then >>>we all will be please, However i wont! hold my breath. Cheers~ >> >>If in the first 3 games Tiger lost to ruffian, and Tiger seemed not to even have >>claws, then I would NOT say play more. I would say that it is virtual evidence >>either that Tiger is not all that great, or that something else was wrong, in >>this case-I'd think the later. >> >>A strong machine should be seen to be "playing chess", unlike a strong human who >>might just be having a bad day. >>3 games lost, is 100% loss throught three games. And the first 3 games are >>statistically much more substantial than any other 3, even consecutive, >>somewhere later on. (because, why the very first three?). > >Are you just trolling? > >pgn -D > 1 DEEP FRITZ 2w0 2b0 2w0 2b0 2w0 2b= 2w= 2b1 2w= 2b= 2w= 2b0 2w= 2b= 2w1 2b1 >2w1 2b0 2w= 2b1 2w= 2b1 2w1 2b= 2w1 2b1 14.0 312.0 168.00 26 > 2 DEEP JUNIOR 1b1 1w1 1b1 1w1 1b1 1w= 1b= 1w0 1b= 1w= 1b= 1w1 1b= 1w= 1b0 1w0 >1b0 1w1 1b= 1w0 1b= 1w0 1b0 1w= 1b0 1w0 12.0 364.0 168.00 26 I didn't believe that these order of results were arbitrary. It looked very much like this Fritz was very great at learning against this Junior. It happened more than once like this between these two very rivals and versions. S.Taylor
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.