Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 11:47:23 05/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2004 at 14:29:52, Drexel,Michael wrote: >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. > >Do you own the rest? (Hiarcs 9,The King 3.23,Chesstiger,Ruffian 2...) I usually test Falcon in gauntlet matches against the following programs: Shredder Junior Fritz Hiarcs Tiger Deep Sjeng Ruffian Nimzo SOS Crafty And 5 other programs that I change from time to time. I haven't tested Falcon against The King. > >Michael
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.