Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:39:27 05/13/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 13, 2004 at 04:23:57, Bernhard Bauer wrote: >On May 13, 2004 at 02:57:54, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On May 13, 2004 at 02:46:45, Bernhard Bauer wrote: >> >>>On May 12, 2004 at 10:50:26, WAEL DEEB wrote: >>> >>>>Hi, >>>>why to play 1 minute games,it's tooo long....I suggest 1 second per game,no >>>>no,1/4 second per game or even 1/8 second per game,our life is too short >>>>:-(....yes,we'll have a lot of games with superior quality :-) >>>>Regards, >>>>Dr.WAEL DEEB >>> >>>This way we get much more games and therefore the error margin is reduced. >>>It's stats what counts. >>>Regards >>>Bernhard >> >>The problem is that you get different information in that way. >> >>I suspect that a program that plays random moves can be a champion at 1/8 second >>per game because it can beat all the opponents on time(at least if you care to >>use hardware that is slow enough. >> >>Uri > >That's another important point. Use slow hardware! Sorry, but I forgot that >advice. >BTW: Crafty6.4 was better than Crafty7.x in a specialtournament, thats why I >recommanded it. >Poor SSDF, they use Crafty18.12!! Perhaps they had no CB version of at least >Crafty16.20. > >We all remember old Genius beating Garry Kaparov on a Pentium 90. >So the way to go is obvious: >Use old programs on slow hardware! >Regards >Bernhard Unfortunately I am not going to test in that way but I will be happy to help. If someone has hardware that is at least 3 times faster than my hardware then I will be happy to replace hardwares. Remember that older and slower is better so it is probably a bad deal for me to get faster hardware unless I also get money as compensation. Uri
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.