Author: Rex
Date: 05:48:04 10/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
I DO not agree. Ruffian is MUCH stronger at longer time controls. Running
against CT 15 NORMAL I play 10 games at 120/0. 1.533Ghz with ponder off each
running 196Meg of ram using default books.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
CT 15 Normal: .5 1 0 .5 .5 0 0 .5 .5 0
Ruffian: .5 0 1 .5 .5 1 1 .5 .5 1
Result CT15 3.5
Ruffian 6.5
Ruffian is an egine that should be looked into more!
On October 07, 2002 at 04:37:29, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>On October 07, 2002 at 03:32:27, Jouni Uski wrote:
>
>>Just reminder, that there is update in http://wlotzka.bei.t-online.de.
>>
>>1.Fritz 7 06.09.2002 2734
>>2 Chess Tiger 14.0 23.03.2001 2670
>>3 Shredder 6 21.11.2001 (D)2642
>>4 Hiarcs 8 05.04.2002 (GB) 2628
>>5 The King 3.12c 05.07.2001 (NL) 2616
>>6 Ruffian 1.0.0 23.09.2002 (SWE) 2592
>>7 Junior 7 29.05.2001 (ISR) 2576
>>8 Gandalf 4.32h 23.11.2000 (DK) 2555
>>9 Nimzo 8 22.09.2000 (A) 2546
>>10 Crafty 18.13 11.01.2002 (USA) 2529
>>11 Yace 0.99.56 25.09.2001 (D) 2515
>>12 Little Goliath 2000 v3.6 07.05.2002 2498
>>13 Aristarch 4.4 02.08.2002 (D) 2493
>>14 SOS.2 for Arena 23.03.2002 (D) 2488
>>15 Tao 5.4 05.08.2002 (NL) 2480
>>16 Pharaon 2.62 20.01.2002 (D) 2477
>>17 Ikarus V0.18 05.04.2000 (D) 2460
>>18 LambChop 10.88 05.05.2001 (NZ) 2448
>>
>>This is based to 340 games...
>>
>>May be Ruffian should play Kramnik and not Junior?!
>>
>>Jouni
>
>What was the time control of these 340 games? Most probably blitz where Ruffian
>is indeed very strong. But playing at longer time controls, Ruffian is still a
>good engine but the results become worse. An example is the running match 40'/40
>on Ath 1.3/256 with 64 MB hash, ponder=off, vs TheKing 3.23X = 6.0-10.0 for
>TheKing.
>Kurt
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.