Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 08:09:19 02/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2004 at 19:20:37, Will Singleton wrote: >On February 16, 2004 at 18:42:10, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On February 16, 2004 at 18:34:30, Will Singleton wrote: >> >>>On February 16, 2004 at 18:27:28, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On February 16, 2004 at 18:09:07, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>> >>>>>In the archives I found that several people have published corrected versions of >>>>>the ECM test suite. Could anyone please mention the link to the latest revision? >>>> >>>>the corrected one is not a corrected one but a raped one. Some good positions >>>>were thrown out because the persons in question didn't understand the position, >>>>or were confused because the great position did have a deep win, but not the >>>>annotated win but some other move was written down in the confusion one day. >>>> >>>>if something is hard to find it doesn't mean you should kick it out of a testset >>>>IMHO. >>>> >>>>So using a corrected ECM doesn't make sense. Using however the same ECM with >>>>improved solutions and alternatives makes more sense. >>> >>>Do you have such a version? I'd be interested in testing it. >>> >>>Will >> >>Yes i have such a corrected version (a position or 500 i corrected not the last >>500). >> >>No i won't spread it. Ask Uri, he doesn't agree with my corrections anyway. > >I'm asking you. I think a subset of ECM, by a chessplayer and programmer such >as yourself, would be very valuable. And not only to me, but to the amateur >computer-chess community at large. > >Will To quote someone: "you won't find anything interesting for engines above 2400". I won't be breaking that rule. Thanks, Vincent
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.