Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: I disagree

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 10:08:22 01/03/04

Go up one level in this thread


On January 03, 2004 at 12:28:18, Dave Gomboc wrote:

>On December 31, 2003 at 03:35:57, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On December 31, 2003 at 03:11:07, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>I disagree (NT)
>>
>>You will clearly earn money from releasing a free version that is stronger than
>>Crafty.
>>
>>If you do not do it and you do not try to prove that your program is at least
>>better than Crafty by participating in tournaments like WBEC then the
>>conclusion of most readers is that Diep is probably still weaker than Crafty.
>>
>>Uri
>
>Diep tends to finish in a reasonable position, albeit under the commercials, at
>real tournaments.  If the conclusion of most readers is that Diep is probably
>still weaker than Crafty, then they're not reading between the lines.
>
>I'm not saying that your idea is bad, though.
>
>Dave

Diep always used more than one processor so the fact that it is finishing behind
the king and Ruffian and by more than one point suggest that it is not slightly
weaker than them.

I do not know but I believe that Crafty could do better results than Diep in the
same tournaments(assuming no special preperation against the opponent and it is
impossible to do special preperation against Diep when Diep is not available).

It does not mean that Diep of today is still weaker than Crafty but based on
history results there is no reason to believe that Diep is better than Crafty.

GreenLightchess also did good results and the programmer did not claim that it
is better than Crafty.

I remember a tournament when Quark did a good result including beating shredder
when Quark was weaker than Crafty.

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.