Author: Georg v. Zimmermann
Date: 13:27:37 11/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 2003 at 16:05:45, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 02, 2003 at 15:38:11, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: > >>It has been repetetly explained by GCP, Christophe Theron and others that the >>opening book, the opening learning etc. form an integral part of the chess >>program as a whole. >> >>From this it follows that testing some programs with other books, one program >>with other books, etc. can certainly give interesting data. But it will not tell >>us which program is stronger. > >The point is that I am not sure if the data which program is stronger is the >most interesting data for the customers. > >I think that we also need another list that rank the engines and not the books >when the engines start to play from random position from GM games that is the >first position in that game that was not played in more than one game and both >engines get both colors of that position. > >Uri Yes, you have said that a number of times. And I do believe it is a valid point you are making. I would be most interested in such a rating list that tries to find out: "which is the best possible combination of chess components" ? But that is not what the SSDF has answered in the past. And it is not what the SSDF should answer in the future. Because otherwise we lose a good rating list which tries to answer "which is the best program ?". Georg
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.