Author: Johan Hutting
Date: 07:35:36 10/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 2002 at 20:11:57, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 20, 2002 at 19:37:18, Johan Hutting wrote: > >>On October 20, 2002 at 15:22:41, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>The >>_released_ >>>winboard version of Ant is clearly better >>>than the >>_released_ >>>winboard version of Celes. >> >>which is over a year old anyway. > my point was that comparing with ancient released versions is silly. Especially at low level the strength varies a lot. >Ant winboard version is also old. > >What is your estimate for the level >of Celes relative to the winboard engines >in Leo's tournament? No clue, if I see larsenVB and tscp playing in 3rd division I wonder what Celes does in 4th :) > >Is it better than the public Ant? I don't have ant installed on my computer. >>> >>>It lost against the baron and celes with >> >>so baron is also clearly worse then ant? > >Baron is clearly better than the winboard Ant but >It was not clear for me if it was better than >the last Ant. 'clearly better' is a bit harsch I suppose. I valued (a stable) ant at ~2300, while baron is ~2200. It's been a while since I tested with Baron though. > >The point is that they repeated the same opening after losing >and in both games the queen got from d8 to d5 and d6 and d8. It's so amazing Kasparov still plays 1.e4 after all those games he lost with it :x Openings have so many variations that you could still opt to play them, even if you lose a couple of games with it. If you look at the games Ant played you'll notice it doesn't pick the 'best' move in some positions. Celes went down to -0.05 after 15.c3 after which I considered the opening to be going well for them. >I know that there is an opening 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 >3.Nc3 Qd6 but even if this opening is good >it seemed from the games that Ant did not know to play >it so it is a clearly bad choice for opening book. See previous comment. > >>Ant only scored 1 point vs Djenghis and a very lucky half point vs ZZZZZ. >> >>>1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 and in both games the queen came later to d8. >>> >>>I do not understand this opening choice. >> [snip] >>Perhaps you should participate in a tournament yourself to figure out the >>importance of good books, well tested engines and why to use unreleased >>versions. > >If I participate I participate with unreleased version >to prevent preperations but I do not plan to participate with untested version. That's a healthy idea :) I have a much faster version of Celes (speedup 20-25%) but I'm not sure if it runs stable. Perhaps I'll play with it next week. > >I do not believe in the importance of books and the >success of List with no book convince me that a book >is not very important. As I pointed out to Shark, what works for other people may not work for you. >I believe that something with similiar level to list4.61 >that is unknown with no book or a very small book >has good chances to get 50%. > >My latest movei(not public) has book and pondering >but my tests are almost always with no book when >I always change the >first move so I can get different games. hmmm, you'll still get alot of repetitions that way.
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.