Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 10:43:52 05/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2004 at 13:25:56, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On May 01, 2004 at 13:10:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 01, 2004 at 12:28:40, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On May 01, 2004 at 11:26:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On May 01, 2004 at 07:21:59, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 01, 2004 at 05:21:08, Sune Fischer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 01, 2004 at 05:04:54, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 01, 2004 at 04:33:59, Sune Fischer wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On May 01, 2004 at 00:58:02, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On April 30, 2004 at 22:44:40, Chessfun wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Diep is now in the #3 programs >>>>>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362447 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>And Falcon is a Grandmaster strength program about 2700 ELO. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>And assuming "Shredder 8 is the only engine that consistently scores above 50% >>>>>>>>>>against Falcon in my tests" >>>>>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362348 we can therefore assume >>>>>>>>>>it's #2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>That leaves Shredder 8 at #1. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Lucky both the #2 and #3 program are neither for sale or available else some may >>>>>>>>>>even report they are #1 ;-) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I would suggest to both programmers that they get a good team of beta testers >>>>>>>>>>and start posting game scores and results that would be deemed realistic. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Sarah. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>At least in the case of Falcon the programmer did not claim that it is one of >>>>>>>>>the top 3 engines. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>He used the Fritz8's book for Falcon in his tests and he even did not claim that >>>>>>>>>in these conditions Falcon is better than Fritz or Junior. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Shredder 8 is the only engine that consistently scores above 50% does not mean >>>>>>>>>that Deep Fritz8 or Junior8 cannot do it but only that they did not do it in all >>>>>>>>>of his tests. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"Consistently" is not a mathematical word :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>So it depends how you read "winning consistently", it could mean just winning on >>>>>>>>average, or it could mean it wins all the time ie. never losing or even drawing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I think the latter is too strong, ie. if you have the match results >>>>>>>>60-40, 55-45, 89-11, 48-52, 61-39.... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I'd still say one engine here is winning consistently, ie. it is who wins on >>>>>>>>average that is the most obvious interpretation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>see http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362354 >>>>>>>winning consistently means that usually Shredder win a match of 4 games. >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes and the example also says that Falcon usually scores around 50% against >>>>>>Fritz. >>>>>> >>>>>>>Of course it is not well defined and the question how you read usually but I >>>>>>>will say that it means more than 50% of the matches. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If Fritz wins 40% of the matchs of 4 games when Falcon wins 30% >>>>>>>of these matchs then Fritz does not beat Falcon consistently inspite of the fact >>>>>>>that it is slightly better by that definition >>>>>> >>>>>>Yeah this might have been what he meant, it didn't quite come off like that. >>>>>>Omid also saw people that people were misunderstanding it, and he didn't do >>>>>>anything to correct those that read it to being as strong as Fritz. >>>>> >>>>>People seem to be reading anything they want into anything posted. I originally >>>>>posted that Shredder is the strongest engine, and look at all the nonsense >>>>>people have started. Why disturb the fun? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>So once and for all, Omid, could you be more specific so we can lay this to >>>>>>rest? >>>>> >>>>>I have already been specific as to what I meant: >>>>> >>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362354 >>>>> >>>>>I measure the imrovement of Falcon not with a series of long matches against a >>>>>specific engine, but by conducting gauntlet matches against 15 programs, 4 >>>>>matches with each (using equal hardware, one processor, equal books, etc). While >>>>>Shredder 8 repeatedly scores more than 50% in the 4 games, Fritz and Junior >>>>>sometimes end up with more than 2 points out of 4, and sometimes with less. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>The above is pure nonsense. I suggest the following: >>>> >>>>1. If English is not your native language, and you can't write in English and >>>>make it clear what you are trying to say, _DON'T WRITE_ in English. >>>> >>>>2. If English is a language you understand, then stop writing such nonsensical >>>>things. For example: >>>> >>>>"Shredder is the only program that consistently beats Falcon" has a very precise >>>>meaning to a native English-speaker. Namely that all other programs can not >>>>beat it consistently, which clearly means that Falcon beats the other programs >>>>consistently or else draws many matches (but it still must win or draw more than >>>>it loses for the sentence to remain consistent). >>>> >>>>"If they thought they could win, they would come" has only one interpretation no >>>>matter how much you try to twist and spin the meaning of each word. "if they >>>>thought they could win, they would come" is a statement of fact. Which _does_ >>>>imply "they didn't come, so they didn't think they could win." Any attempt to >>>>twist that is just nonsense. >>>> >>>>I'll leave you with a well-known proverb: >>>> >>>>"it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth >>>>and remove all doubt." >>>> >>>>Whether your statements are intentionally misleading or not doesn't matter. >>>>They _are_ misleading. And they are not credible. >>>> >>>>That's all there is to it. >>>> >>> >>>Feel free to shoot in the air as much as you want. I clearly said what I meant >>>at http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362677. >>> >> >>So you _really_ find it impossible to be honest and straightforward and simply >>say "Fritz beats me more games than I beat it. Ditto for Junior and the other >>top commercial programs..." > >That is *not* the case. I repeat it for the nth time: based on my tests on equal >hardware and equal book, Shredder is stronger than Falcon; Falcon, Fritz, and >Junior are in the same level; and Falcon is stronger than the rest. Just post your results, like this example (Crafty on ICC): -- Opponent Wins Losses Draws Perf br Deveraux 0 1 0 0.00 br SinbadGonnaD 0 3 0 0.00 br vonRichthofe 0 1 0 0.00 br Dauntless 0 1 1 25.00 br giant 0 1 1 25.00 br glories 0 1 1 25.00 br Feisty 2 5 1 31.25 br Lindisfarne 1 3 2 33.33 br BountyHunter 1 6 10 35.29 br Bitpusher 1 7 13 35.71 br JAZZELED 1 2 1 37.50 br Somnus 1 2 1 37.50 br winner3 3 6 3 37.50 br pathologist 7 8 3 47.22 br Joecreek2004 0 0 1 50.00 br NubianMagic 0 0 1 50.00 br TheBigChill 1 1 1 50.00 br Vangard 1 1 0 50.00 br ajop2 1 1 0 50.00 br allAdreamOfA 1 1 1 50.00 br epanek2 1 1 0 50.00 br stormx 5 4 8 52.94 br X-Engine 20 11 18 59.18 br AmazingGrace 41 17 23 64.81 br AlligatorPOP 1 0 2 66.67 br bookbuilder 6 2 3 68.18 br Dhaka 4 1 3 68.75 br SearcherX 4 1 3 68.75 br Yace 4 1 3 68.75 br Data 23 8 7 69.74 br ajop 2 0 2 75.00 br tlg 4 1 1 75.00 br PostModernis 12 2 4 77.78 br Amateur 4 0 2 83.33 br muse-comp 11 1 2 85.71 br Advance 2 0 0 100.00 br Clooby 7 0 0 100.00 br CottonwoodC 1 0 0 100.00 br HangerOn 1 0 0 100.00 br Nutibara 1 0 0 100.00 br Rascal 2 0 0 100.00 br Sweere 1 0 0 100.00 br TAL9000 3 0 0 100.00 br Tinker 1 0 0 100.00 br cro-magnon 1 0 0 100.00 br punter 1 0 0 100.00 br rigacombinat 2 0 0 100.00 br TOTAL 186 101 122 60.39 bu Sweere 1 0 0 100.00 bu TOTAL 1 0 0 100.00 sr Bitpusher 0 1 0 0.00 sr Feisty 0 2 0 0.00 sr Vangard 0 1 0 0.00 sr workuta 0 2 1 16.67 sr X-Engine 1 2 1 37.50 sr Amateur 1 1 3 50.00 sr CheetahX 0 0 1 50.00 sr DIEP 1 1 0 50.00 sr Dhaka 1 1 0 50.00 sr Good-Boy 1 1 2 50.00 sr RollingThund 1 1 0 50.00 sr RuffianY 1 1 1 50.00 sr SearcherX 1 1 0 50.00 sr Sjeng 0 0 1 50.00 sr Sukkubus 4 4 5 50.00 sr Tinker 1 1 0 50.00 sr Zappa 0 0 1 50.00 sr chepla 4 2 4 60.00 sr Kronos 1 0 3 62.50 sr Yace 2 1 0 66.67 sr HangerOn 1 0 1 75.00 sr SpiderChessX 1 0 1 75.00 sr TAL9000 1 0 1 75.00 sr stormx 1 0 1 75.00 sr thebaron 5 1 1 78.57 sr bodo 2 0 1 83.33 sr ArasanX 2 0 0 100.00 sr BrassCube 1 0 0 100.00 sr ChompsterX 3 0 0 100.00 sr PostModernis 1 0 0 100.00 sr Tohno 1 0 0 100.00 sr Waltercomp 1 0 0 100.00 sr TOTAL 40 24 29 58.60 su Rybka 0 0 1 50.00 su PostModernis 1 0 0 100.00 su SpiderChessX 1 0 0 100.00 su TOTAL 2 0 1 83.33 -- TOTAL 229 125 152 60.28 > > >> >>And you want to hang on semantics that can be interpreted as favorable to your >>results, while (again) trying to weasel out of the normal and usual >>interpretation any sane person would make of your statement? >> >>Your inability to fix this is worse than your originally making such a statement >>in the first place... >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>But who cares what I meant, let's continue the fun here :) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>-S. >>>>>>>Uri
This page took 0.01 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.