Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:40:30 09/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 2003 at 16:09:15, Russell Reagan wrote: >On September 19, 2003 at 15:22:04, Claude Le Page wrote: > >> Hello! >> Why not corespondance play ( or E-mail play ) between engines , with usual >>rules of correspondence play ?? >> it could be interesting for players chiefly interested by analysis >> Friendly Yours >> Claude Le Page > >I imagine correspondance games between computers would take WAY too long to >determine which engine is better. I tried playing a computer match at 40 moves >in 4 hours (repeated), and it easily took over a day for some of the games to >finish because the programs would get into the late endgame and it would be a >dead draw, but the programs would move their rooks around for 50 moves. Imagine >a correspondance game where the last 100 ply was nothing but pointless rook >moves. You would waste half a year in finishing a single game. Maybe if you're >lucky you finish two games a year, and you can have a meaningfull match by the >end of your life. Of course, by then, the programs you are using to play the >match with are completely outdated and no one will really care. The number of correspondence computer games that you can finish in a year is dependent on the number of computers that you have. If you have 1000000 computers then you can play 1000000 correspondence games in a year and determine which engine is better. If the right person is interested then it is not an impossible task. You only need to buy one year of computer time from million persons and I guess that it is possible to do it for 1,000,000,000$ 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.