Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 22:32:48 09/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 07, 2004 at 20:22:13, Christopher Morgan wrote:
>On September 07, 2004 at 13:39:07, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>
>>On September 07, 2004 at 12:32:20, David Dahlem wrote:
>>
>>>On September 07, 2004 at 12:06:03, Christopher Morgan wrote:
>>>
>>>>Eduard,
>>>>
>>>>Interesting results so far. Please post the settings.
>>>>
>>>>In recent tournaments posted here Aristarch 4.50 has had very strong results.
>>>>On my AMD 64 3000+, 200MB hash, at 40' + 30", no tablebases (Pro Deo can’t use
>>>>TBs), I have a 30 game match in Shredder 8 CB GUI, alternating colors, ponder
>>>>off, Pro Deo 1.0 (Rebel 2 setting) v Aristarch 4.50 using the 15 Fischer Random
>>>>Chess openings where the king and rooks (only) are in their classical starting
>>>>chess positions so that normal rules of castling apply. CB/engines not set up
>>>>to play true FRC, however, by using the 15 selected positions only you do get
>>>>true FRC games. After ten games it’s 8-2 in favor of Pro Deo: Pro Deo 6 wins, 4
>>>>draws, and no losses. Average length of the games is 64 moves which adds an
>>>>additional 32 minutes to each engine clock making max game time for each
>>>>engine’s thinking time about 72 minutes on average. I understand that both Pro
>>>>Deo and Aristarch play better at longer time controls.
>>>>
>>>>This match should be a good test of pure engine strength.
>>>
>>>I'm not so sure about this last statement. I think engines are programmed to
>>>play from the standard start position. For example, they are rewarded for
>>>advancing the center pawns, controlling the center, etc. which might not be best
>>>in FRC!!
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Dave
>>
>> Hi Dave
>> I fully agree with your statement. FRC is different from
>> classical chess and may not be the correct way to compare
>> the playing strength in matches with classical chess.
>> Kurt
>
>Kurt,
>
>At least in the 15 FRC test positions in blitz games we see the usual suspects
>at the top of the list. See http://www.beepworld.de/members53/frc-list/ This
>leads me to believe that the ability of an engine to analyze is, at least,
>substantially independent of what position it is analyzing for its best move.
>With the typically huge opening books and tablebases we are looking at tactics/
>middlegames for the most part, not at all unlike FRC. Controlling the center,
>developing your pieces, advancing pawns, are the same in FRC in the opening as
>in classical chess, as well as checkmate, the object of the game. Fischer
>wanted to eliminate the effect of rote memorization of long opening sequences
>and he was successful. He did not disturb the “theory” of chess.
>
>Chris
Hi Chris
You are perhaps right and from my posting you can see
that I used the word "may" -:)
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.