Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 06:49:45 09/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 2003 at 04:43:27, swaminathan natarajan wrote: >then which is the best time control for blitz games? >taht will show the engines original strenght I don't think there is a "best" time control. If you want to know the "best" engine, probably longer time controls are better. If you want to know the program with the fewest and least significant weaknesses, probably very fast games will show that. Take SmarThink or Yace for example. These engines, in my experience, have bad results against a program like Ruffian in 1 minute games. I think the reason is not that they are THAT much weaker than Ruffian, but that their time management probably isn't as sophisticated, and in a 1 minute game that can cost you the game. So SmarThink and Yace have a weakness in their time management. At longer time controls, this weakness is covered up. The same thing happens for all kinds of weaknesses. If a program lacks some kind of knowledge, it can cover up that weakness by using extra search. In a 1 minute game, that weakness will be exposed. This is why you often hear programmers saying that their engine "performs better at longer time controls", or how "<insert engine here> is very strong at longer time controls." It isn't really stronger. Rather, fewer of its weaknesses are being exposed.
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.