Author: Wayne Lowrance
Date: 05:02:23 10/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 2002 at 03:36:27, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 20, 2002 at 01:43:26, John Smith wrote: > >>On October 19, 2002 at 23:59:52, John Rice wrote: >> >>>Thanks for the replies Uri and Wayne. My time controls generally range from 8/8 >>>up to 12/12. I did know about the fisher time control problem, and have tried >>>hard to utilize Tigers time controls (without increments) in the most effecient >>>manner. It gets difficult trying to guess what time limit to set when playing >>>12/12 games, but I get it close most of the time. Using the exact same set-up >>>with Chess Tiger 14, I get much better results at Yahoo than I do with Chess >>>Tiger 15. Is it possible CT15 has taken a step back in strength as opposed to >>>CT14 at these time controls? >>> >>>On October 19, 2002 at 17:40:46, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On October 19, 2002 at 17:32:48, John Rice wrote: >>>> >>>>>I haven't run any comp-comp tournaments with Chess Tiger 15, but I have had time >>>>>to play many online games at Yahoo's advance chess lounge against my usual >>>>>fellow program players. So far, I have to agree with John Smith and a few of the >>>>>other posters who are not having the success they expected with Chess Tiger 15. >>>> >>>> >>>>What time control do you play? >>>>I read that tiger15 does not support the fisher time control correctly so you >>>>should play x minutes per game or x minutes per y moves. >>>> >>>>Uri >> >> >> >>For the disappointing results in Yahoo(Hmmm, I wonder what your id is)is because >>of the blitz timers a certain number of individuals employ there (CT15 is not >>very good at blitz). > >I do not have tiger15 but I am surprised to read it. > >I know that christophe does not believe in programs that are weaker in blitz >and he tries to do tiger better at all time control. > >I think that you should check if you give tiger the right hash tables(I read >that the default setting are too small) > >I know that tiger15 was number 1 in chessfun's rating list and clearly better >than Tiger14. > >Uri Uri, my experience with Tiger 14 at Advanced (almost exclusivly blitz there) Tiger14 was not the best blitzer and too much hash at these timers was detrimental,. As I said in a earlier post something like 32 meg was better than maxed out hash. Just my experience. Thanks Wayne
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.