Author: David Dahlem
Date: 11:10:24 09/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 08, 2004 at 13:09:17, Mathieu Pagé wrote: >On September 07, 2004 at 19:05:11, David Dahlem wrote: > >>On September 07, 2004 at 18:56:11, Mathieu Pagé wrote: >> >>>On September 07, 2004 at 18:15:54, David Dahlem wrote: >>> >>>>On September 07, 2004 at 15:25:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 07, 2004 at 14:26:10, David Dahlem wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 07, 2004 at 13:29:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On September 07, 2004 at 12:26:59, David Dahlem wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On September 07, 2004 at 11:46:59, Axel Schumacher wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On September 07, 2004 at 10:38:25, Cliff Sears wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Has anyone done a tournament Crafty's to see if maybe one of the older versions >>>>>>>>>>may be better than the newer versions? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I seem to recall someone awile ago saying they thought Crafty 18.13 was one of >>>>>>>>>>the best. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Here the Crafty-Version I tested in my Tournament (after 133.000 games, Blitz): >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Crafty 16.1 2539 94 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 17.13 2646 867 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 17.14 2627 125 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 18.10 2651 665 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 18.12 2657 359 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 18.13 2585 231 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 18.14 2625 242 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 18.15 2632 327 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.00 2486 117 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.01 2616 304 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.03 2640 350 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.03 Nimzovich 2427 15 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.03 Petrosian 2662 48 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.03 Stein 2668 198 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.04 Fischer 2685 231 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.04 Stein 2672 136 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.04b Stein 2615 47 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.05 2634 80 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.06 2646 110 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.07 2628 92 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.07 SE 2610 57 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.08 SE 2630 89 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.09 2652 143 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.10 CCT6 2663 126 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.11 2643 105 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.12 2627 302 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.13 2632 196 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.14 2616 259 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.14 nonsmp 2586 108 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.15 2672 373 >>>>>>>>>Crafty 19.17 2621 70 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Cheers >>>>>>>>>Axel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Hi Axel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Which build of Crafty 19.17 did you use in this test? I am currently testing two >>>>>>>>builds by Peter Skinner, an all-processor build, and a build optimized for a P3. >>>>>>>>Both versions surely seem to be doing much worse than previous versions. :-( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Regards >>>>>>>>Dave >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You need to be sure and clear position learning files before a match, and be >>>>>>>sure that the two versions use different book.bin files or learning will >>>>>>>definitely be broken. >>>>>> >>>>>>Thanks. But i am not testing one Crafty version against another Crafty version. >>>>>>I am testing against different engines. And i don't use the Crafty book. I use a >>>>>>custom pgn book with the Arena pgnbook option, so both engines play both sides >>>>>>of each fairly equal line. >>>>>> >>>>>>Dave >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Different flaw then. Crafty has learning code. You are playing without using >>>>>it.... What difference would the book make since if a commercial program plays >>>>>against crafty in a real tournament, crafty will _not_ be using some half-baked >>>>>book that might not fit its playing style very well? >>>>> >>>>>However, I only care about "best" vs "best" myself, others might be interested >>>>>in some other sort of comparison, but I will never play in a WCCC event without >>>>>having a reasonable book, so any other kind of match won't give much useful >>>>>information IMHO... >>>> >>>>Well, it's just my personal opinion, but if both engines are using the same >>>>book, in fact, play both sides of each line, then it's a fair match. :-) >>> >>>In Fact it is not, since Crafty has been handicaped. In my opinion, if you realy >>>want to compare two engines you have to let them compete with all their >>>functionalities enabled (Or anything the engine creator think is the best >>>combination). >>> >>>In this case it is clear that Robert think that Crafty should use it's own book, >>>since anything else would just be "Crafty without optimal opening book". >>> >>>I don't really understand why people think it is not fair to let the enginnes >>>use any techniques they can in order to win. I have seen post here of people >>>thinking that a fair match would have to be played without openings books, >>>without endgames database. I even see people arguing that the memory print of >>>the engines should be limited to some undreds Kb. >>> >>>Hey ! We are programming "Automated chess players", not only AlphaBeta searcher, >>>so anything not involving human intervention during the game should be allowed >>>(Humman intervention between the games of a match or a tournements are >>>questionable). >>> >>>Mathieu Pagé >> >>Hi Mathieu >> >>I have to respectfully disagree with everything you say. And i don't see how >>anyone can call using tablebases in a match as "playing", since it is only >>looking up moves in a list, not playing or even thinking about the moves! > >Is it playing a move on the board ? If so this is a "Automated chess player >playing a move". > >OF course it is your time and your testing methodology, but it is not your >engine. And the author of this engine feel his engine should not be tested with >this handicap. So you have 3 choices: >- You test Crafty as Robert feel it should >- You test Crafty as you want it to be and called it something like "Crafty with >non official Book" >- You don't care at all about what the engine's author want. > >Mathieu Pagé I care about the moves an engine makes based on its "thinking", PERIOD Regards Dave
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.