Author: Igor V. Korshunov
Date: 15:02:26 10/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2003 at 10:08:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 14, 2003 at 08:00:48, emerson tan wrote: > >> >>I played a 24 game match between chessmaster9000 default and chessmater9000 >>without book with time control of 40 moves in 2 hours and the result was 13.5 to >>10.5 in favor of cm without book. 8 wins for without book and 5 wins for the >>default and 11 draws between them. >> >>Its seems that the one with no book "understands" the position better than the >>one without the book because it calculates from move one therby can follow the >>progress of the position from move one, the computer decides how the position >>progress and it arives in a position that the computer likes and knows how to >>play it. unlike the one with book,it may not know well how to play the position >>after it is out of the opening. that's just my wild way of explaining it, but >>seriously, why did the one without book beat the default one? I was expecting >>the default one to beat the one without books because you can see that from the >>earlt part of the game, the one with book was usually way ahead of of time, >>leaving it much more time to calculate complications in later part of the game. > > >Something has to be wrong. In a 40/2 game, most openings should go for 10 >moves. That gives one program an extra 30 minutes on the clock since book >moves are played instantly. That extra 30 minutes is significant. Add to >that the fact that several openings have deep traps that can't be seen by a >normal search, and the gap should widen farther. 30 minutes is not significant. It is can give in average 10 Elo points. Such difference can't be noticed in 24 games match. Finally, I can say that 24 games is not enough to decide that this result strange.
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.