Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:00:42 11/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2003 at 23:58:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: OK. I see your point. I thought that was something I might have said years ago. But it was Amir. When I originally tried to look, the link failed. Later it worked and I found the context... Bob >On November 21, 2003 at 22:37:40, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>Guess who said these words in early 1997: >> >>-- >>Of course a Rebelx100 - Rebel match or Craftyx100 - Crafty match won't >>prove a thing. The x100 program will win big. Doesn't have anything to >>do with the evaluation-NPS debate. >>-- >> >>Here is a link (recombine URL). >>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1926445472d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_drrb=b&as_mind=29&as_minm=3&as_miny=1995&as_maxd=28&as_maxm=3&as_maxy=1997&selm=333A4938.6F17%40msys.co.il >> >>I found it quite amusing, given the current attitude from the person who posted >>that message. > > >I'm not sure what your point is. I think the above is perfectly clear in >its meaning. All else being the same, search depth clearly makes a program >better. > >However, the context was "is faster better?" when comparing deep blue to >the micros. That's where the "thread" started, if you notice... > >I have _always_ been consistent here. In some cases, knowledge certainly >replaces depth. See the trojan horse thread near the top. But that only >covers so much. _not_ a 100:1 which was the speed difference we discussed >with the deep blue vs micros back in 1996 and 1997...
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.