Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 23:51:02 06/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 2003 at 00:50:29, Mike S. wrote:
>Recently it has been critized that SSDF doesn't test King 3.23 (yet), it has
>been discussed, explained why not, etc.etc.
>
>(Purists of 40/2h shouldn't continue to read :-))
>
>I think nowadays, 10m+10s can provide a perfectly valid comparison too. On this
>rating list created by Mr. Klaus Wlotzka for CSS Magazine,
10+10 or 2+2 are the worst time controls you can imagine for Chess Tiger because
it does not handle Fischer time controls correctly.
Actually you can do even worse by playing 1+100 for example, but 10+10 is
already a big problem for Tiger.
So I'm surprised that it ends up at such a good place...
Christophe
>http://www.computerschach.de/rangliste/
>
>(For the details of the test conditions, click "Testbedingungen" in the menu.)
>
>You can see King 3.23 has achieved rank #4 just behind Fritz, Shredder and
>Tiger. King is running with Sel. 12 there (and 128 MB hash, rest default), so I
>guess it could do a few points better with additional setting changes, i.e.
>higher king safety. OTOH, I doubt that King could jump to rank #3 by that, which
>is 17 Elo away. 17 Elo is a big distance nowadays in top computer chess.
>
>King 3.23 is 71 (!) points ahead of current #5, List 5.04!
>
>Let's not argue about 2 points more or less on the top :-)
>
>(Junior 8 is the next to appear in the list; who can guess it's ranking?)
>
>That rating list is based on 20-game-matches using a set of 10 very short
>opening variants, with a total of 400 games of each engine.
>
>You'll notice that the main list includes only one recent version of an engine,
>each (unlike SSDF). But there's an "ewige Rangliste" too, see menu, which
>includes all matches played so far to allow easy performance comparison with the
>predecessor.
>
>Very interesting is too, when you click "Übersicht" (=overview) in the menu,
>where a comparison with the performance in 2m+2s blitz is given, using arrows.
>For example, here you can quickly see that Hiarcs 8 was much better in that
>short blitz (more than 50 Elo), while Shredder 7, Tiger 15 and List 5.04 were
>better on the medium time control (20...50 Elo).
>
>Regards,
>M.Scheidl
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.