Author: Graham Banks
Date: 12:23:10 10/26/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 26, 2004 at 15:03:29, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >On October 26, 2004 at 14:48:01, Graham Banks wrote: > >>On October 26, 2004 at 14:41:52, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>On October 26, 2004 at 14:21:43, odell jones wrote: >>> >>>>Just wondering has there been any extensive test to show that chessmaster is >>>>significantly stronger then the previous version. >>> >>> There is such a test: please have a look at >>> http://www.utzingerk.com/cm10k.htm >>> Kurt >> >> >>This is great work Kurt. However I still believe that the best CM10th settings >>(whatever they turn out to be) will still outperform the best CM9000 settings >>due to the fact that CM10th Default is stronger than CM9000 Default. >>There's a lot of testing still to be done! >>Graham. > > Hi Graham > I fully agree with you. It should be possible to create > CM10-settings that are stronger than the best CM9-settings. > But this time it's not me or my chessfriend Rolf Bühler to > find out as we have stopped testing/playing with CM10th > for a while: too tired with all the work and engine author > Johan de Koning does anyway not seem to have much interest > in such tests. > Kurt No problems my friend. There are many others who will carry out CM10th settings testing. An interesting point to note is that a friend of mine who is running a 40/2hrs tournament on his dual Operon with ponder on has CM10th Default settings except for selectivity 14 winning after 13 rounds ahead of Shredder 8, etc. Graham.
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.