Author: William Penn
Date: 09:19:39 10/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2004 at 09:32:37, James T. Walker wrote: >On October 14, 2004 at 02:29:53, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 13, 2004 at 20:36:53, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On October 13, 2004 at 08:03:36, Tony Hedlund wrote: >>> >>>>On October 13, 2004 at 07:21:53, William Penn wrote: >>>> >>>>>It's good to see these test results being posted here again! >>>>>Any idea when the next SSDF list will be published? Sorry if that has already >>>>>been mentioned. I was away from this board for awhile. >>>>>Thanks, >>>>>WP >>>> >>>>I don't know. It seem like my friends are losing interest. We are now discussing >>>>if/how we will continue. >>>> >>>>Tony >>> >>>I hope that before you decide to quit you will at least consider using shorter >>>time controls. Nobody plays 40/2 anymore except SSDF. >>>Jim >> >>1)It is not nobody. >>As far as I know thorsten is using 40/120 in his tournaments and other people >>like Leo use 40/40 on faster hardware that is almost the same as 40/120. >> >>The time control in WCCC was 60/120+30 but considering the faster hardware it is >>even slower time control than SSDF. >> >>2)The fact that most people use shorter time control is a good reason to have >>40/120 because we have enough information about >>shorter time control. >> >>Uri > >"Nobody" means humans in tournaments/matches not computers. The WCCC time >control is fine. The fact that SSDF is using old/slow hardware in comparison is >not important at this time. Most people are not using Quads at home now. I was >suggesting the faster time controls to increase data in a given amount of time >since I believe that results will not vary greatly from 3 min/move to 2 min/move >or even faster. Getting faster results is more interesting to most testers than >sticking to the old 40/2. (My opinion from experience beta testing with others) >Jim I am only interested in correspondence chess, so the slower the better. For that purpose 40/2 is borderline acceptable as a testing time control, but certainly not anything faster. A minimum time control for correspondence play is 1 hour per move, but preferably at least 4 hours per move for each player. That comes to 80-320 hours of computer time needed for a 40 move game. Don't say it is impossible. This sort of long computer analysis is being used by thousands of correspondence chess players today! WP
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.