Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: 2nd. Question: How could you draw this conclusion?

Author: Arturo Ochoa

Date: 17:21:05 10/14/03

Go up one level in this thread



>while preparing the opening book for Ruffian I decided to use a very good
>positional program for Ruffe's sparring partner.  I decided on Diep due to its
>impressive positional play.  Diep also has an interesting and unorthodox opening
>book with lots of lines that are worth analysing.  No small wonder, the book's
>creator is a super strong Fide Master, the author of Diep:  Vincent Diepeveen.
>
>Be it as it may, I matched Ruffian with only a skeleton of the book to be
>(meagre 1538 positions for starters) and pitted the positional monster against
>the fast searcher.   The result was a little disappointing and I must say that

1) I will wondered how you got this book. However, my question is: if you
declare that the book has "a lot of lines that worth
analyzed" ( ???? I dont how because this book was created in 2 hours), I could
conclude a very different thing: You are begin very sarcastic saying that this
book is a researched book coming from ".... a super strong Fide Master .... "

I could assure that Vincent Diepeveen, a strong player, would never create such
book with irregular openings including the move 1. Nh3.


2) How can you test a book with a mere time of 5minutes and how can you draw
definitive conclusions considerin the book used for the Match and the time
setup? Also, could  any engine of 1995 have any possibility against Ruffian, an
engine of 2003? Because, again, how did you get the last Diep Version 2.XXX from
2001?



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.