Author: David Mitchell
Date: 19:27:04 03/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 22, 2004 at 06:47:00, Jason Kent wrote: >When cm is in its gui, it gets tablebases and the other engines don't. If >theking is exported anywhere else it cant have tablebases because its format is >unique. > >But still, I'm sure shredder is better than cm9000. people have used auto232 >with cm9000 vs all of the top engines and i think it was like 10th on the list. >if cm9000 continually does better in its gui something is wrong. What data do you have that supports your theory? Anything around 30 games or more could be statistically important. Another possiblilty is that the top Chessbase engines "cheat" whenever they detect the auto232 communication program in use. There are various ways to do that, and I doubt if SSDF, or most users, would ever know. One technique mentioned by Ed Schroeder, IIRC, involved the cheating engine constantly requesting the time, when the opposing engine was on the move. The net effect was to severely limit the system resources of the opponent. I'm glad you brought up this topic, but I wish you'd take a larger view, and have acquired a (hopefully large), number of games to support your theory. dave
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.