Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 14:08:18 12/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 2003 at 16:57:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 14, 2003 at 09:13:12, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>On December 14, 2003 at 08:52:57, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 14, 2003 at 07:17:13, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>> >>>>On December 14, 2003 at 00:02:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 19:15:00, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 19:02:23, Sune Fischer wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 18:29:42, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 18:12:17, Russell Reagan wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 05:31:25, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Well, if without Chessbase engines you'll have a better event and make progress, >>>>>>>>>>I won't stand in your way. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Your statement sounds like the people who tried to hold on to DOS too long when >>>>>>>>>Windows (and other multitasking operating systems) were clearly the future. >>>>>>>>>"Well, if without real mode you'll have better programs and make progress, I >>>>>>>>>won't stand in your way." You don't hear too many of those people these days. Is >>>>>>>>>Ed Schröder the only one left? :) Clearly, multiuser and multitasking operating >>>>>>>>>systems are progress over DOS. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>45 participants is a heck of a lot more than 14. If there are 40 participants >>>>>>>>>instead, that's still a heck of a lot more than 14, with plenty of strong >>>>>>>>>competition. If we had this kind of participation along with the Chessbase >>>>>>>>>engines, that would be great, but I'll take 40+ participants with no Chessbase >>>>>>>>>participants over 14 including Chessbase participants. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What was the average rating in Graz? What is the average rating in CCT? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>By this logic the tournament would have been even better with only Shredder, >>>>>>>Junior and Fritz. >>>>>>>The others just dragged down the rating, obviously. >>>>>> >>>>>>OK, let me put it this way: how many top programs participated in Graz? How many >>>>>>will participate in CCT? >>>>>> >>>>>>Having a chess championship without Junior/Fritz/Shredder is like having a >>>>>>football worldcup without Brazil, Italy, Germany, England... (and if like CCT >>>>>>you don't have any "drug tests", then Argentina will easily win, thanks to >>>>>>Maradona :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If quantity is the only important factor for you, then you can take 100 free >>>>>>>>winboard engines, run a tournament on your computer, and crown the winner with >>>>>>>>the world champion title. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Quantity is important, quantity means support, interest and recognition. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Where was Tiger, where was Rebel, Ruffian, SmarThink, Crafty, Yace... in your >>>>>>>little shootout? >>>>>> >>>>>>Had they thought they had any chance to win the championship, they would have >>>>>>shown up. >>>>> >>>>>That statement is so far beyond stupid... it really doesn't deserve a >>>>>response. Drop over to ICC tonight or tomorrow night, try the quad opteron >>>>>Crafty on for size in a game or two. Then come back and make that statement. >>>>>It's been hitting 9M+ nodes per second and is _not_ a pushover. >>>> >>>>Brutus has been hitting 20M+ nodes per second in Graz, so what? >>>> >>>> >>>>>I could >>>>>probably have shown up with a 16-way machine at the very least. Do you _really_ >>>>>think it would have no chance? :) >>>> >>>>It is up to you to think about your chances. Had you thought you had real >>>>chances, you would have shown up. >>>> >>>>Again, Brutus had a far better evaluation than Crafty, far better search, and >>>>far better nps, and it only ended 4th. >>> >>>How do you know that brutus had better evaluation >> >>?!? >>I saw the evaluations. >> >> >>>and better search than crafty? >>> >> >>Search depth, branching factor... Crafty's search and evaluation hasn't changed >>much in the recent years. >> >> >> >>>> >>>>On the same hardware, Falcon never scores less than 80% against Crafty, and it >>>>only ended 10th. >>> >>>Did you test against 19.06 and not 19.03?(results that I read suggest that 19.06 >>>is an improvement) >> >>How much improvement? 1% speedup? 2% speedup? 5% speedup? But the same search >>and evaluation I guess. > >You should stop guessing. I _know_. > >What better source than to ask??? OK, I'm asking. ? > > >> >> >>>Did you test with own books and not with Fritz8.ctg? >> >>I don't think it will matter. You use your own books to direct the engine into >>positions it plays well. Against Crafty, Falcon has no problems in any kind of >>position. (This is not true for Junior for example. In the last test, Falcon >>beat Junior 4.5-1.5, but I don't think this difference of strength will hold >>true if I test Junior using its tournament book.) > >Please feel free to come to ICC and demonstrate such outright and overwhelming >superiority. Programs like Shredder, Junior, Tiger, etc are _not_ beating me >80% of the time. > >It is much easier to actually run the experiment than to guess... > >I'm always available... > In turn, I would like to invite you to Israel next year, to participate in a real tournament. I'm sure getting the title World Computer Chess Champion will silence any critics. > >> >> >>> >>>Uri
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.