Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 11:53:39 10/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2002 at 13:19:39, Aaron Tay wrote: >On October 25, 2002 at 12:25:27, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On October 25, 2002 at 12:04:50, Aaron Tay wrote: >> >>>On October 25, 2002 at 12:00:57, Sune Fischer wrote: >>> > >>>>>SSDF did not test Fritz7.0.0.1,Fritz7.0.0.2 and Fritz7.0.0.8 as different >>>>>programs >>>> >>>>How strange. >>> >>>Hate to point out the obvious . But Given that customers pay seperately to get >>>Fritz 6, 7, DF 7 whatever, surely, it makes sense to test those seperately so >>>customers can decide whether to upgrade? >> >>But they don't pay seperately for CT and GT :) >> >>>Not sure how you handle cases like Crafty which are free though. >>>Also the case of Chess Tiger 14/GT 2. Otherwise Chessmaster (if tested) could >>>have a dozen entries , one for each personality. >> >>Yeah, that is my point :) > >I suppose the thinking at the time was that they play very differently, and >deserves to see if one was clearly stronger than the other. If i recall, the >author couldn't decide.. > > >Still it seems to me in this case SSDF helped the author do his testing for him >when deciding between 2 "personalities" :) . > > >I also took a look again. I see Gandalf 5.0 and 5.1 listed seperately. >Does anyone know the policy that governs whether SSDF lists a seperate entry or >combines them into 1? > >>I think the "real" SSDF list should be a one author - one entry list, the main >>reason for that is that the SSDF is considered an author ranking list (IMO >>anyway) and you shouldn't be able to push down your competeters by simply >>releasing new versions. >> >>Crafty for instance has been pushed way down to 21st, quite confusing I think. > >Acutally I'm not certain what your concern is. Most people are bright enough to >realise that programs with the same name Fritz or Tiger are by the same author. I hope so :) My concern is that it is in principle possible to flood such a list with the same program. That makes the list boring and confusing at the same time. I understanding was that the SSDF should be the computer version of the FIDE ranking list. We don't have 5 Kasparovs on that list, so we shouldn't have 5 Frans Morsch's on this one either :) Ok, so the SSDF is _not_ an equivalent, but it should and could be! ;) IMO they should spend their time testing more engines instead of many versions of the same engine, but that _is_ just my opinion :) >Additional confusion I think is that you have the same program tested on 2 >different hardware. I see two Fritz 7s for example. Add the multiple versions >and personalities , 5-8 authors can take the top 30 places.. > > >>However, I think they should keep a link to a version of the list as it is now, >>since that list has some other valuable information. > >Well it's just presentation. More information is better than less. Not when the "relevant" information becomes a needle in a haystack ;) >>-S. >On October 25, 2002 at 12:25:27, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On October 25, 2002 at 12:04:50, Aaron Tay wrote: >> >>>On October 25, 2002 at 12:00:57, Sune Fischer wrote: >>> > >>>>>SSDF did not test Fritz7.0.0.1,Fritz7.0.0.2 and Fritz7.0.0.8 as different >>>>>programs >>>> >>>>How strange. >>> >>>Hate to point out the obvious . But Given that customers pay seperately to get >>>Fritz 6, 7, DF 7 whatever, surely, it makes sense to test those seperately so >>>customers can decide whether to upgrade? >> >>But they don't pay seperately for CT and GT :) >> >>>Not sure how you handle cases like Crafty which are free though. >>>Also the case of Chess Tiger 14/GT 2. Otherwise Chessmaster (if tested) could >>>have a dozen entries , one for each personality. >> >>Yeah, that is my point :) > >I suppose the thinking at the time was that they play very differently, and >deserves to see if one was clearly stronger than the other. If i recall, the >author couldn't decide.. > > >Still it seems to me in this case SSDF helped the author do his testing for him >when deciding between 2 "personalities" :) . > > >I also took a look again. I see Gandalf 5.0 and 5.1 listed seperately. >Does anyone know the policy that governs whether SSDF lists a seperate entry or >combines them into 1? > >>I think the "real" SSDF list should be a one author - one entry list, the main >>reason for that is that the SSDF is considered an author ranking list (IMO >>anyway) and you shouldn't be able to push down your competeters by simply >>releasing new versions. >> >>Crafty for instance has been pushed way down to 21st, quite confusing I think. > >Acutally I'm not certain what your concern is. Most people are bright enough to >realise that programs with the same name Fritz or Tiger are by the same author. > >Additional confusion I think is that you have the same program tested on 2 >different hardware. I see two Fritz 7s for example. Add the multiple versions >and personalities , 5-8 authors can take the top 30 places.. > > >>However, I think they should keep a link to a version of the list as it is now, >>since that list has some other valuable information. > >Well it's just presentation. More information is better than less. > >>-S. >> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>-S.
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.