Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Junior 5 engine seems at the same level of Hiarcs engine

Author: Alessio Iacovoni

Date: 01:47:41 10/22/98

Go up one level in this thread


On October 22, 1998 at 04:19:40, blass uri wrote:

>
>On October 22, 1998 at 04:04:33, Alessio Iacovoni wrote:
>
>>On October 22, 1998 at 03:31:10, blass uri wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>On October 22, 1998 at 03:22:57, Alessio Iacovoni wrote:
>>>
>>>>I just finished my tests with the engine-engine function of Junior. This time I
>>>>was careful to reduce hash sizes in order to avoid any mistakes from possible
>>>>delay due to the hard disk grinding (I believe this was the reason for those
>>>>problems in the previous tests).
>>>>
>>>>Processor: AMD 200 MMX
>>>>Cache: 8 M
>>>>Total games:32
>>>>Time control: 10 minutes
>>>>Book settings: Same openings played by both sides
>>>>Book: Fritz5
>>>>Result:
>>>>
>>>>Hiarcs 6: 10
>>>>Junior 5: 10
>>>>Draws: 12
>>>>
>>>>Just from these first results it is interesting to notice that when both sides
>>>>play the same opening (eliminating any randomness), playing strength seems to
>>>>even out incredibly. I wonder if test are carried out in the same way by SSDF.
>>>>If not, why?
>>>
>>>not by the same way.
>>>
>>>1)They give every program its opening book because they  want to test the level
>>>of the program(good opening book is a part of it)
>>
>>As I have already stated in the past I don't agree with this... When talking
>>about the strength of a program people generally (aside for experts) do not
>>refer to the book but to the engine...Does SSDF explicitly state that program A
>>+ book A ranks higher than program B + book B? If not it leads people to think
>>that it it the engine alone that is stronger, which is not the case (see any
>>thread on computer.chess). That I know of the SSDF lists do not mention at all
>>the book used in listing the strength of the programs.
>
>They assume that it is obvious that they use the books that are sold with the
>programs.
>

>I saw games and I know that they use the books of the programs.
>
>Sometimes the books are counter productive.
>I saw a game between fritz5(Pentium200)  and Mchess6(P90) that was a draw by
>book(firtz5 was white).
>
>I think that fritz5 had good chances to win without book.
>,
>>>
>>>2) they do not do engine v engine but play with 2 computers so every program can
>>>"think" in the opponent's time.
>>>
>>
>>Ok.. I know that. Separate computers is better.
>>
>>>3)They play 2 hours per 40 moves and not 10 minutes for all the game.
>>>
>>
>>Why? Is that the time control usually adopted by the people that buy computer
>>programs (WOW 2 hours/40 moves seems quite boring to play against a computer).
>>Also.. can the ranking of a computer at 2h/40 moves say anything about it's
>>strength at 30 minutes per game? or 10?
>
>I am interested in longer time control because I use the computer to help me in
>my correspondence games.
>

Come on Uri.. you're not the "average" 90% i was referring to.

>Uri
>>
>>
>>>Uri



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.