Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:19:23 10/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 27, 2002 at 01:04:19, Mike S. wrote: >On October 27, 2002 at 00:11:02, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On October 26, 2002 at 20:36:30, Dana Turnmire wrote: >> >>>The Genius programs have always been known in the past as top notch blitz >>>programs. Mr. Lopez posted that Ruffian had beaten Genius 6.5 by a score >>>of +46 =4 -0. > >>This score is clearly a mistake. There must be a problem in the setup of the >>experiment. > >I know from my test that Genius 98 (very similar to -5/6/6.5 AFAIK) is still >competitive *in terms of tactics* at least to the top amateur's level, except >Ruffian which is near Nimzo 8 in that part IMO. > >But is it possible that Genius 6.5/7 is positionally inferior nowadays? Although >I wouldn't believe it, considering the good reputation of Genius. OTOH, the >positional part of the WM-Test(100) may indicate why that extreme result above >isn't too unlikely: In the positional part of that test with 36 >positions, Ruffian solved 22 - and Genius 6.5 solved only 7!! > >http://www.computerschach.de/test/index.htm > >In addition to that, we do not know if, and how many, games Genius has lost on >time in that match. I wouldn't be surprised, because Auto232 on 1 computer is >unusual and probably has not been tested by programmers. > >Regards, >Michael Scheidl If genius lost a lot of games on time then it is a surprising result because in that case I expect the tester to give this information. I see no point in playing a lot of comp-comp games without looking at the games. Uri
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.