Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 19:09:51 12/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 2003 at 19:23:28, Sune Fischer wrote: >On December 29, 2003 at 19:08:12, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>On December 29, 2003 at 17:28:46, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>On December 29, 2003 at 15:47:05, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>I'm not exactly sure what your point is, we are not talking about humans. >>> >>>I guess you are implying that Crafty is 1800 and Shredder is 2830 and so Crafty >>>is without a chance. >>> >>>That is utter nonsense of course. >>> >>>In REALITY Crafty with a big hardware advantage is maybe 50 points weaker than >>>Shredder, so in your human analogy that would be like Kramnik winning in front >>>of Kasparov. >>> >>>If you play only 11 rounds it could happen. >> >>OK, lets do a little math. >> >>We know crafty on 2G P4 is about 20-30 elo stronger than Junior on a 266 >>celeron. >> >>now, I think that: >> >>Using Junior's tournament book: 50 elo for Junior >>2x hardware advantage rather than 10x: 80 elo for Junior >>4xP4 vs 266 celery: 80 elo for Junior >> >>Suddenly its game over for Crafty. >> >>So the question is: which of those statements do you disagree with? > >I'm assuming Bob can scale Crafty's hardware advantage to keep up, ie. that he >could get a 16 or 32 node machine to use against the quads. > >The only worry is if there is diminishing returns or some pratical problems in >using so many CPUs. >I do not believe in all that nonsense about tactical barriers, so I think it >will mainly be the technical challenge of it. > >About the book I don't believe in 50 elo. >If Bob uses his normal tailor made book full of ICC learning I think it can hold >its own, it may even be better than a book full of abstract theory the engine >doesn't understand. > >-S. > >>anthony I don't what a good book is worth (elo points) -- but some people get very upset when I play engines without their books - the argument they used is the engine should be used the way it is sold -- I have no argument with that line of reasoning if that is their purpose. My own personal prefernce is use the same (unify)book for my tournaments - becuase I want to know which engine really plays better regardless of book. (that's all, personal preference, ymmv) Of course in Chess Computer Chanpionship tournaments, each author should be able to provide his own book -- as that is part of the preparation and the work of each author. For years, it was my opinion that MChess had the best prepared book for tournaments. I don't know who that was, but he was very good. Maybe it was Marty himself, I am not sure. But you really do need someone to work on a book, esp ically in a short tournament and it has to be updated after every tournament.
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.