Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 16:29:38 01/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 09, 2003 at 03:59:44, David Rasmussen wrote:
>On January 09, 2003 at 02:16:03, bobby palacios wrote:
>
>>
>>Well, I remember I ran a 100 game test of ChessTiger 14 vs Ruffian 1.01 at game
>>in 3 minutes on my pentium 2.4ghz, a while back when Ruffian 1.01 was hot and it
>>ended quite convincingly 50-25 for CT14 before I stopped it, maybe Christophe
>>has a point.
>
>I'm sure he has, but it is an invalid point by his own standards. I wouldn't be
>surprised if Tiger is the better engine of the two. But using the excuse that
>the program performs bad at certain time controls (that are quite simple to
>implement), seems to me to be hypocritical given Christophe's earlier statements
>about other programs.
>
>/David
I have just given what I think is an important information if you are concerned
by the strength of the engine.
The point is that I think the Chess Tiger engine performs quite well, but it's
time management has a problem.
That's not an excuse. Chess Tiger indeed sucks if you use Fisher time controls
with a big increment.
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.