Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 10:39:55 01/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2003 at 12:46:41, Matthew Hull wrote: >On January 20, 2003 at 11:39:27, James T. Walker wrote: > >>Neither will 90 rounds. I've seen some discussion about the >>times/rounds/playoffs of CCT mostly looking for ways to improve the format. In >>my opinion as a spectator the format is great. I even liked the playoff format. >> I believe a world championship was decided in a similiar manner not too long >>ago. Nobody should expect a swiss system event to produce the strongest player >>as the winner every time. However in my opinion this was the case this time. >>I'm also curious about some programmers claiming the blitz playoff is not good >>because their program is tuned for longer time controls. I wonder how you do >>that. I mean if you are playing your program on ICC for games, how does playing >>80% or more of your games at blitz/lightning help you to tune for 40/2? Why >>would you want your program to perform better at 40/2 than at G/5 compared to >>other engines? It seems to me that the SSDF is one of the few organizations >>still using 40/2 for comparison. I see this as an outdated idea. The trend is >>toward faster time controls to better serve the spectators interest. All this >>is from a non programming spectator so don't give it much thought. >>:-) >>Jim > > >In blitz, differences in speed (hardware and software) are more apparent than in >slow chess. If the tourney is a relatively slow time control, then the speed >differences are less of an issue and chess knowlege makes more of a difference. > >Making the palyoff a round of blitz for a slow time-control tourney kind of >misses the point of the tourney. Might as well have them play checkers as the >playoff, IMO. > >Regards, >Matt Not even this prommises a good result on strenght because it might be so That it comes out of book in a position it doesn't like. Though given as an advantage acording theory. espacialy when it is a positional advantage For other programs it can count that it doesn't like to play very tactical games. Kasparov's and Kramnik's reportoir are diferent too. But they play the openings which is most to their likenings A program is not given that choise. plus in some computer computer games luck is a factor. and luck is not strenght. Marc
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.