Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 02:36:08 11/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 2002 at 05:27:05, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On November 28, 2002 at 05:11:04, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>Couldn't we here at CCC organize a "better" list than SSDF? > >Where are you going to get the equal hardware? Well, as you know there is relation between speed and time, slower machines would need more time. Ok, programs don't scale the same on different hardware and some programs may have their time management messed up (although I believe that indicates a bad engine design). If we had enough games, this would smooth out and we would get nice average rating performances. It's not like those lists are done with laser precision anyway (statistical noise being a factor and all). >Playing hundreds of games at the time control the SSDF >uses takes an incredible amount of computer time. Yes, Rome wasn't build in a day, but we have lots of people doing tournaments, it's just a matter of coordinating the results. >>I would like to see more programs on that list, Yace, Ruffian, Aristarch to >name a few! > >I think Yace will be included in the next list, not sure >about Ruffian or Aristarch. Actually I would prefer a list that went "all the way down". There is no reference between e.g. quark and fritz when they aren't on the same list. -S. >-- >GCP
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.