Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 15:41:49 10/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2003 at 17:04:04, martin fierz wrote: >PS re russel's post - i just disagree. playing blitz games is not a good idea to >test engine strength IMO... I don't necessarily believe that if you want to know which engine is superior that you can always find that out from blitz games either. If one engine has a glaring weakness (particularly in time management), then the results are meaningless (other than telling you that you have a weakness). The main point I was trying to make was that you can find weaknesses easier from blitz games against a stronger opponent. In a longer game, a lot of those weaknesses will be hidden. If you had bad time management or king safety, a few dozen 1/0 games against a stronger engine will expose that pretty quickly. You can also play a lot more games when a faster time control is used. With longer games, the games take longer, which means you have fewer games to detect trends, and the trends are hidden more, so you will probably need even more games before you would realize that your time management sucked. But anyway, it's just a theory.
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.