Author: Komputer Korner
Date: 12:46:12 10/20/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 1998 at 14:55:23, William H Rogers wrote: >I don't mean to imply that all people follow the formula that I had proposed, >but just look how fast major players but the newest and fastest machines before >entering competition. After all a gain of 30 or 40 elo points could mean the >title and profits for the people who are in this for a business. >All I was stating was that there should be a standard to make more programs >equal. The example is the game posted where one program was declared the victor >without leaving its opening book. When that happens, you no longer have a chess >program, but an intensive lookup catalog. Do you agree? >I like you, am interested in creating a better chess platform and the more I >learn about programming and stratagies, the better. >My intent was to propose a new way of testing, not to insult anyone. >Bill Any new restriction that you can come up with will unfairly penalize one program over another. Every preogram searches differently so you cannot restrict them that way. Every program handles the time clock differently so you cannot restrict them that way. Every program uses it's opening book differently Ex Crafty, Fritz and Rebel 10 , so you cannot restict them that way. Every program uses the endgame tablebases differently, ex: Crafty dynamic probing vs Fritz static probing vs Mchess combination of the two but somehow less efficiently so you cannot restrict them that way. In short the game of chess is a long network puzzle which cannot be arbitrarily restricted so that you can compare computer software. -- Komputer Korner
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.