Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 08:40:17 01/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2004 at 02:34:25, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >On January 21, 2004 at 01:37:51, Jouni Uski wrote: > >>So what's the explanation for this result: >> >>http://www.f22.parsimony.net/forum41668/messages/27486.htm >> >>This was played on P4 2,6 without pondering and 12 moves common book. >> >>Other tournamets like WBEC have put Ruffian clearly lower. Hmm. Is it pondering, >>book, CPU type, level, chance, manipulation, cheating. Who can repeat this? >> >>Jouni > >Hi Jouni, > >oh, it's my tournament! > >I played after this tournament a match: >Ruffian 2.0.0 - Shredder 7.04 (174 games) with 40/10 and Ruffian losed with >82,5 : 91,5 = 47,41% >Shredder losed 2 games on time! >Ruffian losed 1 game on time! These losses on the clock are hard to understand. One possibility is that an unexpected amount of time was consumed by events outside the engine. This is just speculation of course, but I wonder whether or not the engine programmers made sufficient allowances for unexpected external events. On the other hand, both engines may have significant bugs. Could it be that the test setup itself has created this result? Bob D. >The same conditions! > >I don't manipulation my tournaments! >If you have interest I can send the Arena log file from this tournament. > >Shredder have a very good opening book, Ruffian too but I played with book >random option by Arena. In my opinion Ruffian is not so strong with shorter time >controls and fisher time controls. The results are after all in all, meaning my >complete Ruffian results, normaly. > >Interesting are the results from Deep Sjeng 1.5a too! >Very strong games and results by Deep Sjeng! > >Best >Frank
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.