Author: Graham Banks
Date: 00:53:09 04/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2004 at 03:41:50, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >On April 30, 2004 at 03:17:16, Jouni Uski wrote: > >>On April 30, 2004 at 02:32:48, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>On April 30, 2004 at 01:31:55, Jouni Uski wrote: >>> >>>>Ruffian is improving slowly! And if tested 2.0.2 would score better. >>>> >>>>Jouni >>> >>> Hi Jouni >>> We have not (yet) tested Ruffian 2.0.2 but should be >>> interested if you have some evidence for your opinion. >>> Other people argue that v2.1.0 would definitely be >>> the strongest version. >>> Kurt >> >>There seems to be enough evidence based on >1000 games: >> >>Chessfun: >> >>15 Ruffian 2.0.2 : 2606 44 34 210 56.2 % 2563 40.0 >>% >>19 Ruffian 2.1.0 : 2595 51 34 180 51.4 % 2585 40.6 >>% >> >>Michael 42: >> >>13 Ruffian 2.0.0 : 2664 20 24 646 43.3 % 2710 36.2 >>% >>15 Ruffian 2.1.0 : 2654 23 27 532 43.0 % 2703 35.9 >>% >> >>Frank Q: >> >>Ruffian 2.0.2 against Shredder 8: 15.5 - 24.5 >>Ruffian 2.1.0 against Shredder 8: 09.5 - 30.5 >> >>These are mostly ponder of but I don't think it matter ANY! >> >>Jouni > > > Hi Jouni > Many thanks for these additional information. > Kurt These might all be at one particular time control (?) and the difference in rating is minimal anyway. It could very well be that Ruffian 2.1.0 is superior at longer time controls although initial SSDF ratings don't support this. However I haven't looked at the margin of error. The fact that the Ruffian programmer preferred Ruffian 2.1.0 at Leiden seems to suggest that he feels this version is stronger. Graham.
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.