Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 07:35:28 10/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 12, 2002 at 10:17:09, Harald Faber wrote: >On October 12, 2002 at 09:27:25, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >>There are three differences: >> >>1.) >>Harald Faber is using the autoplayer and two PC's >> >>2.) >>Harald Faber is playing with ponder=on >> >>3.) >>Harald Faber used the kostick.btk (under Shredder-GUI) for CM9 and the >>commercial books for the other programs, whereas we chiefly let all programs >>play with the remis.ctg (write protected, thus no learning). We wanted to test >>playing strenght of engines only and not good/bad books. >> >>In my opinion the last point may have the greatest influence on the outcome of >>matches, and furthermore the Kostick book may be too old fashioned to keep up >>with other modern books. And eventually, there is always a statistical margin of >>error in all matches played. >> >>Kurt > > >IMO the Kostick book is even better for testing than some remis/draw opening >book. Just my 2 cents. >And you forgot to mention > >4) I am testing 40/120+60 whereas you test 40/40. >( 5) The opponents use the 5-man tbs) > >4 SIGNIFICANT differences. With respect to books you are surely wrong Harald. The program (CM_9000) using the Kostick.btk (converted Kostik.opk) has a disadvantage vs the top modern commercial books of Deep Fritz, Hiarcs8 and so on. That was the reason why we gave all program the same remis.ctg book. This book does not at all include lines that lead to drawish games, but the programs are at the same moment out of book in balanced (positional/dynamical) situations. 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.