Author: Dan Kiski
Date: 06:55:37 12/10/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 1998 at 09:42:03, Mark Young wrote: >On December 10, 1998 at 09:13:52, Dan Kiski wrote: > >>On December 10, 1998 at 08:44:29, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>On December 10, 1998 at 08:34:29, Jouni Uski wrote: >>> >>>>So are You testing with random openings. If yes I think 14 games is almost >>>>meaningless! >>> >>>It is not just 14 games. I am running the same settings as other people that are >>>posting here. *To add to the game count*. >>> >>>I could not run any more games then what I did for this testing. This was the >>>limit for CM at one time. And if you read my post, I am running more games with >>>the same settings. >>> >>>SO IT IS NOT MEANINGLESS!!! >> >>As I already stated I agree meaningless, the nunn positions as a start basis >>should be utilized, since opening books are so large and any results over 14 >>games could be only based on opening advantage. > >I sorry, I must be typing in an invisible ink. WE ARE PLAYING MORE THE 14 GAMES. > THERE HAS ALREADY BEEN MORE THE 14 GAMES WITH MOST OF THESE SETTING POSTED >ALREADY. > >> >>Dan Kiski Ok so you are playing more than 14 games, how many opening variations does your computer play, will you play them all as white and black. I can read your ink just can't see why you don't see the results as what they are MEANINGLESS. And that in fact you are just wasting your time by even playing them without setting out specific unbiased criteria for how you are playing them. Dan Kiski.
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.