Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 06:25:14 02/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2003 at 08:28:38, Frank Phillips wrote: >On February 16, 2003 at 08:19:08, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On February 16, 2003 at 07:23:29, Frank Phillips wrote: >> >>>On February 16, 2003 at 07:10:34, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>>The gap between the best programs and part of the free programs programs is more >>>>than 500 elo on equal hardware. >>> >>>Can you point to the data source that supports this claim. > 500 seems a bigger >>>gap that indicated by SDF and ICC. >> >>There are a lot of rating list >>The gap between the best free programs and another part of the free programs is >>also more than 500 elo. >> >> >>Look at the following list >> >>http://www.digichess.gr/infiniteloop/ratings/rapid_rating_il2r.txt >> >>Crafty17.9 2672 >>Movei0.07a 2052 >> >> >>Movei0.07a(my old program) is not extremely weak and it is >>more closer to the top than to the bottom that is >>LaMoSca 0.10 1183 >> >>I said that the gap between the best programs and part of te free programs is >>more than 500 elo. >>I did not talk about the best free programs. > >I did not understand your sentence. Clearly if the one you describe are bey >definition those >500 worse then the statement is obviously true. I had in mind >Riffian, Crafty, Ferret etc > >> >>> >>>> >>>>Hardware that is 100 times faster will not be enough to compensate for that >>>>difference. >>>> >>>>We do not know what was the level of the software of deeper blue because it >>>>never played games on equal hardware. >>> >>>Why should it have to play on equal hardware? It was designed to a different >>>paradigm. >> >>If people use the speed of it as a reason to convince people that it was better >>than we need some information about it's level on equal hardware. >> >>> >>>> >>>>I also doubt the claim that the hardware was 100 times faster and we have no >>>>proof for the number of nodes that it searched(200M nodes could be a >>>>psychological war against kasparov when the real number was only 20M). >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>I wish IBM (or someone) would fund Hsu's next chip. Then we would finally be >>>able to answer these questions Of course, some would then deny the facts if >>>they did not fit their expectations ;-) >> >>No >> >>It can only prove in the best case for Hsu that Hsu is capable to do >>a chip that is better than the top programs of today. >> >>I did not claim that he is unable to do it. >> >>It is not going to prove that DB97 is better than the top programs of today. >> >>Uri > > >Moot as alawys. It was interesting listening to Fed. on chess.fm. He praised >Junior, but did not have it in the same class as DB 1997... Of course he may not >be impartial, but then again neither are the current set of commentators. > >My interest as stated before is more whether we actually need something as good >as DB to stand toe to toe with the elite GMs, or whether a good software package >(Hiarcs, Fritz, Junior....) on a fast PC is sufficient. > >If Hiarcs, Fritz and Junior really are as good as DB97 (in their different ways) >then the answer is yes anyway.... :-) As Bob's little brother I want to participate in the race. Here is my verdict from a science point of view: If you take the best DBnm you could make in 10 years, right, then this DB could STILL NOT stand toe to toe with our then best GM. [Here I must exclude all show event results. Because otherwise I must announce my own becoming World Champion in a match against Kasparov for the incredibly high sum of 230 million US $$ offered of course prior to the MATCH.] :) Rolf Tueschen [Designed World Champion in Show Match of Chess]
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.