Author: Tony Werten
Date: 05:04:02 06/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 2004 at 20:24:52, Dann Corbit wrote:
>On June 09, 2004 at 19:27:37, Derek Paquette wrote:
>
>>On June 09, 2004 at 19:23:11, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On June 09, 2004 at 19:07:39, Derek Paquette wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 09, 2004 at 18:49:40, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Taking on a 3400+ AMD 64 with 2 GB RAM and Fritz 8
>>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1703
>>>>
>>>>this is very annoying for someone who is a chess enthusiast like myself.
>>>>
>>>>why would the company that is marketting this laptop, RISK using a program that
>>>>is 40 elo LOWER?
>>>>i just dont' get it,
>>>>i think it comes down to plain old ignorance of chess programs
>>>>why NOT use shredder 8?
>>>>this is very frusterating, because we never get to see shredder 8 in action vs
>>>>grandmasters at tournament time controls.
>>>
>>>Probably, they have a good reason.
>>>For instance, they might take 7.04 and analyze every game she has every played
>>>at very slow time control. Now, they have a database and expected response for
>>>most of the moves she is likely to make.
>>>
>>>Perhaps the analysis started long ago. They know for sure exactly how it would
>>>work with 7.04
>>>
>>>Bleeding edge is not always the best thing, if you want a reliable outcome.
>>>For the same reason, we won't always see the fastest possible hardware. It
>>>could be that the fastest stuff has not been tested. It would be a mistake to
>>>try an untested system.
>>
>>that is very true, if shredder 8 was released last week, HOWEVER,
>>shredder 8 has been released long enough for the following to happen,
>>SSDF has had enough time to test it
>>ICC is full of shredder 8 (and it turning humans into mince meat)
>>
>>that is enough to say that the program is well tested, and that it would kick
>>the crap out of a human, because its certainly beating around fritz 8.
>
>It it not known whether Fritz 8 would do better against humans than Shredder 8.
>
>We might surmise it from SSDF and WMCCC results, but that is really an
>extrapolation that may not be correct.
>
>At any rate, even the SSDF Elo strength rating also does not decide who is
>stronger:
>
> THE SSDF RATING LIST 2004-04-22 97872 games played by 264 computers
> Rating + - Games Won Oppo
> ------ --- --- ----- --- ----
> 1 Shredder 8.0 CB 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2818 34 -32 481 70% 2673
> 2 Shredder 7.04 UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2809 24 -23 967 71% 2648
> 3 Deep Fritz 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2790 26 -25 855 72% 2625
>
>2818 - 32 = 2786
>2790 + 26 = 2816
1+1=2, also true and also irrelevant :)
The fact that the 2 numbers overlap doesn't meant Shredder isn't stronger.
It says something about the uncertainty that Shredder is stronger.
In this case I guestimate that the correct expression would be: Shredder is
stronger than Fritz with a 85% certainty.
ie:
o
xx ooo
xxxx ooooo
xxxxxx ooooooo
xxxxxxxx ooooooooo
xxxxxxxxxx??ooooooooooo
x+? = uncertainty about elo Fritz
o+? = uncertainty about elo Shredder
? = chance that Fritz is stronger than Shredder
o = chance that Shredder is stronger than Fritz
Tony
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.