Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 22:52:17 10/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 2002 at 18:21:49, Wayne Lowrance wrote:
>On October 20, 2002 at 15:14:58, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On October 20, 2002 at 08:02:23, Wayne Lowrance wrote:
>>
>>>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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>I'm sorry Wayne, but this simply cannot be.
>>
>>Since Chess Tiger 13, there is no drawback for using as much hash table as
>>possible.
>>
>>There was a drawback in Chess Tiger 12 and earlier because the program had to
>>clear the hash table before starting to think. With 192Mb of hash table it could
>>take up to 2 seconds, which was a killer for blitz time controls.
>>
>>I repeat, this is not the case anymore since Tiger 13. You can have 192Mb of
>>hash table and play bullet, there is NO problem.
>>
>>On the other hand, using more hash table always help, even at bullet time
>>controls.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>Okey dokie Christophe, that is good enough for me. I admit my data is not
>scientific, I keep no records in fact I dont use a comp anymore on internet, it
>has always bothered me a little bit but always excused my using it cause I know
>everyone is using it at yahoo advanced. But I guess smaller at blitz is the case
>with Fritz, at least their manual gives formulation for timer vs Hash.
For Fritz maybe, I don't know actually as I do not use it.
>Thank You
>Best results wished for your Tiger
Thanks!
Christophe
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.