Author: Harald Faber
Date: 00:58:28 04/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2003 at 08:14:41, Helmut Conrady wrote: >On April 24, 2003 at 04:01:14, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 23, 2003 at 16:53:03, Helmut Conrady wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2003 at 07:25:15, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>> >>>>Who suggested that Fritz 8.0023 be tested instead of the stronger Fritz 8.008 >>>>version? >>> >>>What results suggest that Fritz 8.008 is stronger? I haven ´t seen something >>>like that so far. >>> >>>Helmut >> >>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?294063 >> >>8.008 scored better than 8.0023 against shredder with the same >>conditions(drawbook). >> >>8.008 lost only 52-48 when 8.0023 lost 59.5-40.5 >> >>Uri > >8.008 is very close to 8.005. In der Best-for-Fritz-Rating-List (10-20 min/Game) >of the German Computer Chess Magazine "CSS" 8.0023 leads with a rating of 2713, >8.005 has got 2696 (Shredder 7.04: 2701, Deep Fritz 7: 2699). It seems all is >very close The <censored>-for-Fritz-list, could you please point out the used time control compared to SSDF? Do you still want to compare FfF-list with SSDF? >BTW: The point is IMO that ChessBase just sent 8.0023 to SSDF. >Helmut Then finally Chessbase gets what it deserves. I am deeply convinced that the strange Nxe4-bug, very early published by Nemeth, has side-effects which hurt Fritz' play and therefore performance. CB knows about it. So when they send this buggy-version to SSDF and don't reach the desired results, well, their fault.
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.