Author: Jonas Bylund
Date: 11:57:35 10/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 2003 at 14:42:45, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >On October 13, 2003 at 14:36:09, Jonas Bylund wrote: > >>On October 13, 2003 at 14:19:14, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On October 13, 2003 at 13:09:03, Charles Roberson wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> You make the statement that Diep is a positional engine and you chose it based >>>>on that. So, why did you run G/5 matches? At G/5 tactics and search depth >>>>is crucial. >>> >>> >>> >>>I would like to bring to your attention that tactics and search depth are >>>crucial at any time controls in chess. >>> >>>Showing dimishing returns from increased search depth is so difficult that in >>>practice there is little difference between blitz and long time controls. >>> >>>If engine A gets a beating at blitz, expect it to get the same beating if you >>>repeat the match with long time controls. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>Now that is not my experience at all, some engines do seem to be much better at >>long time controls than at blitz and also the opposite is the case, however it >>seems that engines that do better at blitz TC's don't have the same margin of >>difference. >> >>Jonas > > >Jonas, > >this _is_ an interesting issue, I admit. However, a very quick glance at the top >section of the SSDF list will tell you that the best blitzers are up there, and >the games played by the SSDF are tournament control games. I can draw a simple >conclusion here. Naturally, there might be some conspicious exceptions... Could >you please name a program that does extremely poorly at blitz and extremely well >at longer time controls? > >Rgds. > >Djordje Maybe not extremely poorly, but Gandalf is an example of a top engine which do not do well in blitz games compared to how well it does in classic and longer time controls. (Gandalf is still one of my preferred engines for LONG analysis) If you look at the playchess.com rating lists you will find that the top rated engines are Deep Fritz 7 and Shredder 7.04. Now Shredder is another example of an engine that, atleast used to do much better at long time controls, it seems that margin has shrunk considerably, but still remains an issue. If it wheren't for dual amd's and xeon's Shredder probably wouldn't be a first choice for many of the users on playchess.com. My point about shredder is that i don't think it would top any blitz lists on equal hardware. The point that CT makes is in theory the "right" approach i think, but in reality things looks different. Regards Jonas
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.