Author: Chessfun
Date: 22:06:58 10/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2003 at 21:19:25, Mike Byrne wrote: >On October 13, 2003 at 22:55:06, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On October 13, 2003 at 20:45:40, Mike Byrne wrote: >> >>>On October 13, 2003 at 20:22:54, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On October 13, 2003 at 20:16:41, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>> >>>>>Believe it or NOT Ruffian 1.0.5 is much better than Fritz 8, Hiarcs 9,Shredder 7 >>>>>and Chess Tiger 15 and possibly Junior 8. I will post some games tomorrow, but >>>>>my opinion is that Ruffian 1.0.5 should have been a commercial program. >>>>> >>>>>Pichard >>>> >>>>Ruffian1.0.5 failed to win WBEC. >>>> >>>>Deep Sjeng won it so I do not believe that Ruffian1.0.5 is better than Fritz8 or >>>>Shredder7. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>Uri, >>> >>>You are so anti-Ruffian , it's not even funny. Yes Deep Sjeng won - by ONE >>>point out of 84 games. The games are not even full length 40/120 20/60 etc,. >>> >>>1: DeepSjeng 1.5 56.5 / 84 >>>2: Ruffian 1.0.5 55.5 / 84 >>> >>>So to say "Deep Sjeng won it so I do not believe that Ruffian 1.0.5 is better >>>than Fritz8 or Shredder7" is Ruffian bashing. >> >>I think if anyone is having an unjustified reaction it's you. The statement in >>question is: >> >>"Ruffian 1.0.5 is much better than Fritz 8, Hiarcs 9,Shredder 7 >>and Chess Tiger 15 and possibly Junior 8." >> >>That is quite a bold statement. It is at best questionable whether Ruffian is >>even on par with the likes of Fritz and Shredder, and certainly it is not "much >>better". At the very top, no engine is "much better" than the rest. >> >>Sure, there are results showing Ruffian finishing ahead of these engines, and >>then there are others that don't show that. Why do you and Jorge choose to >>believe some and then choose not to accept the results from someone as >>experienced as Leo? I'd trust Leo's tournament results before a lot of other >>home tournaments. >> >>To call Uri anti-Ruffian for disagreeing with an unsubstantiated statement such >>as Jorge's, when there is evidence against that statement, is a little brash. > >Uri has consistently put down or attempted to diminish Ruffian an an engine. It >was not that one statement. > >"Ruffian1.0.5 failed to win WBEC. > >Deep Sjeng won it so I do not believe that Ruffian1.0.5 is better than Fritz8 or >Shredder7. > >Uri" > >Do you really think if Ruffian had won, Uri would say: >"Ruffian won it so I do believe that Ruffian 1.0.5 is better than Fritz8 or >Shredder7." Is that what you would say if Ruffian had won?. >Of course not. Therefore, the only conclusion one can draw for his motive for >posting such a gratuitous statement is that it was solely written to "put down" >Ruffian as an engine. I don't see it that way. You could simply say it was a bad explaination that left holes to be exploited. Ruffian 1.0.1 is currently 100 points below Shredder 7 and Fritz 8 according to the SSDF only 40 or so on my humble rating list. But there is no way that 1.0.5 is stronger than maybe 10 points than 1.0.1. That based on the 160 games that I have run with the 1.0.5 version at 60' 3". In fact simply improving it's book and book learning would IMO make a bigger difference than a new engine version. But to say as this thread does that 1.0.5 is MUCH better than Shredder 7 and Fritz 8 is simple rubbish. It is naturally a fantastic piece of free chess software and the author deserves credit but there are already enough fantasy threads in CCC that another don't help. Sarah.
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.