Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 16:10:37 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 I am not sure if the this still true - but my short list of engines that always seemed to to better at LTC than blitz (relative to itself): HIARCS GANDALF The older Shredders might fall into this group as well (Not Shredder 7.0.4 -- very good in Blitz) Tiger seems to play equally strong at any TC. Older Fritzes and Genius (especially) seem to favor fast time controls, weak CPU etc. But a very weak engine at blitz (none of the above) was generally very weak at LTC as well. I also think Dave Kittinger's Wchess engine (used in Novag products and perhaps others) does very well in blitz/ weak processor settings - relative to how well it will do in a LTC/ fast CPU settings. As far as analyzing a position where there are no killer combinations available (quiet position) - my favorite engines to analyse are (alphabetical order): HIARCS Shredder 7.04 Tiger For a mate finder - no engine is faster than CM9K with SS==12. Ruffian is also pretty fast.
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.