Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 09:22:25 08/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 08, 2004 at 11:19:54, David Dahlem wrote:
>On August 08, 2004 at 07:14:05, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>
>>There have just been played 331 games but whilst I think that
>>CM10k_Default may be stronger than CM9k_Default, this does not
>>seem the case in comparison with CM9_T05 and other strong CM9
>>settings. Details at [http://www.utzingerk.com/news.htm]
>>Kurt
>>
>>Es sind zwar erst 331 Partien gespielt, doch zeigt die Tendenz,
>>dass der CM10k_Default wohl besser als der CM9k_Default ist,
>>jedoch kaum an die besten übrigen CM9-Settings herankommen
>>wird. Details bei [http://www.utzingerk.com/news.htm]
>>Mfg
>>Kurt
>
>Hi Kurt
>
>I downloaded your CM10k games, and let EloStat calculate the ratings. I used
>2500 as the default start rating.
>
> Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws
>
> 1 Shredder 8 : 2639 108 144 30 68.3% 2506 16.7%
> 2 Fritz 8 : 2562 120 118 31 58.1% 2506 19.4%
> 3 Junior 8 : 2541 266 141 10 55.0% 2506 50.0%
> 4 Chess Tiger 15.0 : 2517 132 91 30 51.7% 2506 36.7%
> 5 Hiarcs 9 : 2506 97 97 30 50.0% 2506 46.7%
> 6 The King 3.33 : 2505 50 38 191 51.3% 2496 29.3%
> 7 Tao 5.6 : 2398 114 112 30 35.0% 2506 30.0%
> 8 AnMon 5.30 : 2330 149 103 30 26.7% 2506 20.0%
>
>Not too bad for TheKing 3.33. :-)
>
>Regards
>Dave
Hi Dave
Agreed: CM9 default would not have been able to
get a score of 51,3 %
Kurt
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.