Author: Frank Quisinsky
Date: 05:22:51 02/26/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 26, 2004 at 08:02:20, Thomas Mayer wrote: Hi Thomas, >On the other hand: You state in the mentioned posting that you believe that >Ruffian 2.0.0 is about 50-60 Elos stronger then the version 23.06.2003 (which is the Leiden version, am I right ?) No! Version 2.0.0 is clear stronger as the test version from 23.06.03 (not public Ruffian version). >After the results of 2.0.0 were not as good as expected you said that it is not >as strong an blitz. Later you said that it has problems with fisher time >controls. And a bit later you said that maybe the Leiden version (23.06.2003 ?) >is a bit stronger - because the v2.0.0 is - your words - in fact a beta version >and was not tested very much. So what is correct now ? My comments are build from the results which I saw and my own. I search the reason why users have different Ruffian results. The most of the "bad" results I know from user which used ChessBase GUIs. Within my first test was the Fisher time controls and the UCI Ruffian. In the beta test some things in UCI mode are fixed by Per-Ola. Information can be found in Arena Support Forum (longer beta test of Ruffian). >> I add my personal results in my forum and Arena webpages. I have no other >> results. > >I think since the release of Ruffian 2.0.0 you should have now MANY more games - >you even comment on many of the results - always with the same story that your >own results show a difference... But for the conclusion in that posting - >Ruffian 2.0.0 50-60 Elo stronger then Ruffian 23.06.2003 -> how many games did >you have to claim that ? Just a question, not an insult of course ! I have played in the beta test time with Ruffian 23.06.03, later with the Leiden version of Ruffian. Here I have played some games, but the most with 40 moves in 10 minutes. I public different tournaments with Ruffian versions in the last summer on Arena webpages. I test Ruffian with private collected positions too. I have around 500 games with Ruffian 23.06. and around 400 games with Ruffian Leiden. The most are 40/10, played under Arena Chess GUI. >You may remember the Gandalf-story... There you also said that it is one of the >best if not the best engine at all. Gandalf was strong those days and still is - >but there was a difference between dreams and reality. At this time my CCE tourney was running. I believe the biggest tournament which I ever see in WWW. 18 months tournament time with games in 40 moves in 40 minutes. Look in the SSDF and the Gandalf results. In the time of Gandalf are Fritz 6 and Junior 6 available. The first versions of Fritz 7 are not so strong later are Fritz stronger. You can see the different from Gandalf to Fritz 6 and Junior 6. The same differences in my CCE tournament. The SSDF tested Gandalf on slower AMD systems and Gandalf need time too ... you can see it now on the faster Athlon 1.2 GHz systems. You can see ... I give of every questions an answer. Maybe we can make an interview :-)) >Besides that -> you might have read my complete posting: >a) I pointed out that I still believe that Ruffian 2.0.0 is stronger then >Ruffian 1.0.1 >b) I even defend you that it is possible that your results seem to indicate that >it is way better. Yes, I saw it! At the moment I try to find out the problem! With Shredder and many games I can say more and the results can be found in Arena Event Forum with log files and so on. >Seems that you offend everybody who tries to defend you... not very kind... it >seems that you still must realize that you are a businessman in computer chess >now and must live with bad and good news. I believe that some of the older heros >here like Ed or Ossi can tell you much about hits bellow the belt in that >business. The SSDF-Result is of course not such a hit - it's simply reality. I >hope that we will not see anotherone now you forces the SSDF to take an engine >off the list. Not interesting what you know wrote! I am user of chess software and computer chess is not my World of buisiness after my "Erfahrungen" in the last years. The SSDF results are now reality, of course yes! But more interesting is to search why the Ruffian results are different. This is much more important for me. >Greets, Thomas > >P.S.: And believe me, the result of Ruffian 2.0.0 will get better - so far only >~ 150 games are played and only 4 opponents. It might not jump 100 Elos ahead >but I have no doubts that it will end up higher then Ruffian 1.0.1... Ruffian 2.0.0 is in fact around 75 ELO stronger as Ruffian 1.0.5 and within I believe 100 ELO stronger as Ruffian 1.0.1. Do you know the results by Patrick Buchmann, Alex Schmidt and much other persons in WWW. On the machine of Wilhelm Hudetz the newer Ruffian won in front of Shredder. You can find a lot of such results in WWW but bad results too. Now we have to test and to find out the reason for it. 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.