Author: Chessfun
Date: 15:37:08 01/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2004 at 17:35:17, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>On January 01, 2004 at 13:54:00, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>
>>On January 01, 2004 at 12:50:56, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>>
>>>On January 01, 2004 at 09:24:39, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>>
>>>>Is this
>>>>
>>>>a)
>>>>A further example that hardware is less important
>>>>than most people think
>>>>
>>>>or
>>>>
>>>>b)
>>>>a sign that Deep Fritz 7 is very much stronger
>>>>than Deep Sjeng 1.5
>>>>
>>>>or
>>>>
>>>>c)
>>>>other reasons?
>>>
>>>My conclusion is that either program is able to beat the other one.
>>>
>>>Any ELO difference derived from this match alone will vanish in the statistical
>>>uncertainty.
>>>
>>>Uli
>>
>>
>> Hi Uli
>> True in principle but have you considered the difference
>> in hardware used?
>
>Yes, I had realized it. I had been referring the hardware-software combinations.
>Extrapolating this result to equal hardware results in a probabiltity that Fritz
>may be stronger.
>However, one should be aware that in view of the number of games (46) the
>statistical uncertainty is still larger than 100 ELO.
>
>A numerical example. Let's say the result on the above hw was 50%. Then a rough
>estimate is that Fritz has a 70 ELO advantage (resulting from the hw
>disadvantage). With a statistical error larger than 100, one can still not
>exclude that Sjeng is stronger - even on same hardware.
>
>However, the result seems rather to indicate some advantage for Fritz.
>Nevertheless, I think that Sjeng's result in this match isn't bad at all. 50 -
>80 ELO behind Fritz is a good result for a newcomer, imho.
>
>Uli
That's about the result I have. Under the assumption that the hardware was 2x in
this match which translates to about 70 points. On mine equal hardware I have a
difference of 66.
Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws
2 Deep Fritz 7 : 2639 33 28 354 56.8 % 2591 35.6 %
22 Deep Sjeng 1.5 : 2573 41 55 150 47.7 % 2589 34.0 %
(2) Deep Fritz 7 : 354 (+138,=126,- 90), 56.8 %
Fritz 6 : 10 (+ 4,= 4,- 2), 60.0 %
Deep Fritz : 10 (+ 4,= 5,- 1), 65.0 %
Junior 6a : 10 (+ 7,= 2,- 1), 80.0 %
Hiarcs 7.32 : 10 (+ 7,= 2,- 1), 80.0 %
Chess Tiger 14.0 : 20 (+ 5,= 6,- 9), 40.0 %
Gambit Tiger 2.0 : 17 (+ 7,= 6,- 4), 58.8 %
Junior 7 : 9 (+ 4,= 1,- 4), 50.0 %
Deep Junior 7 : 10 (+ 8,= 1,- 1), 85.0 %
Fritz 7 : 10 (+ 2,= 6,- 2), 50.0 %
Crafty 18.13 : 10 (+ 8,= 1,- 1), 85.0 %
Shredder 6 : 10 (+ 7,= 2,- 1), 80.0 %
Tiger 15 normal style : 28 (+ 6,= 15,- 7), 48.2 %
Hiarcs 8 : 10 (+ 3,= 2,- 5), 40.0 %
Shredder Paderborn : 10 (+ 4,= 3,- 3), 55.0 %
Crafty 18.15 : 10 (+ 7,= 3,- 0), 85.0 %
Chessmaster 9000 : 10 (+ 4,= 5,- 1), 65.0 %
Tiger 15 gambit agressive : 10 (+ 1,= 3,- 6), 25.0 %
Ruffian 1.0.1 : 10 (+ 5,= 5,- 0), 75.0 %
Shredder 7 : 20 (+ 8,= 9,- 3), 62.5 %
Fritz 8 : 30 (+ 8,= 16,- 6), 53.3 %
Shredder 7.04 : 20 (+ 6,= 7,- 7), 47.5 %
Deep Sjeng 1.0 : 10 (+ 6,= 3,- 1), 75.0 %
List 504 : 10 (+ 3,= 4,- 3), 50.0 %
Junior 8 : 10 (+ 3,= 2,- 5), 40.0 %
Deep Junior 8 : 10 (+ 2,= 3,- 5), 35.0 %
Hiarcs 9 : 10 (+ 5,= 1,- 4), 55.0 %
Deep Sjeng 1.5 : 10 (+ 1,= 5,- 4), 35.0 %
Ruffian 1.0.5 : 10 (+ 3,= 4,- 3), 50.0 %
(22) Deep Sjeng 1.5 : 150 (+ 46,= 51,- 53), 47.7 %
Junior 6a : 10 (+ 4,= 3,- 3), 55.0 %
Nimzo 7.32 : 10 (+ 4,= 5,- 1), 65.0 %
Fritz 5.32 : 10 (+ 5,= 1,- 4), 55.0 %
Chess Tiger 14.0 : 10 (+ 3,= 3,- 4), 45.0 %
Gambit Tiger 2.0 : 10 (+ 3,= 4,- 3), 50.0 %
Fritz 7 : 10 (+ 3,= 2,- 5), 40.0 %
Hiarcs 8 : 10 (+ 3,= 3,- 4), 45.0 %
Shredder Paderborn : 10 (+ 3,= 3,- 4), 45.0 %
Deep Fritz 7 : 10 (+ 4,= 5,- 1), 65.0 %
Shredder 7 : 10 (+ 1,= 6,- 3), 40.0 %
Shredder 7.04 : 10 (+ 4,= 3,- 3), 55.0 %
List 504 : 10 (+ 2,= 4,- 4), 40.0 %
Deep Junior 8 : 10 (+ 1,= 1,- 8), 15.0 %
Hiarcs 9 : 10 (+ 3,= 4,- 3), 50.0 %
Ruffian 1.0.5 : 10 (+ 3,= 4,- 3), 50.0 %
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.