Author: stuart taylor
Date: 15:56:31 12/29/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 2004 at 07:33:51, Albert Silver wrote: >On December 28, 2004 at 20:44:54, Derek Paquette wrote: > >>On December 28, 2004 at 20:29:03, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 28, 2004 at 17:46:15, Derek Paquette wrote: >>> >>>>On December 28, 2004 at 17:26:23, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 28, 2004 at 17:07:54, Derek Paquette wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 28, 2004 at 15:26:16, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Matches at 40’/40 + 40’/40 +40’ time control >>>>>>>Junior9-GUI, ponder=off, 3-/4-men EGTB >>>>>>>own books, no book learning, no learning >>>>>>>on 4 Athlons 1.3/64 MB hash for all engines >>>>>>>First defeat of Junior9 vs Shredder8 in this test. >>>>>>>http://www.utzingerk.com/jun9_test.htm >>>>>>>Kurt >>>>>> >>>>>>Kurt, Junior 9 is known as an aggressive engine, how do you find Shredder 8 >>>>>>handled this? Did it attack aswell or defend defend defend and then finally win >>>>>>in the endgame? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In my opinion there are different reasons why Shredder8 >>>>> won this match: the German program is very good at defence >>>>> - stronger than Junior9 - knows more about pawn structures >>>>> and plays the endgame better than Junior9 ... and some pawns >>>>> given away by Junior9 did not bring the expected result -:) >>>>> Maybe the difference between these two very strong engines >>>>> will become smaller at longer time controls. >>>>> Kurt >>>> >>>>Kurt, did you happen to notice which program was searching deeper? >>>> >>>>Junior was 'known' as being the deepest searcher, but shredder 8 changed all >>>>that, which searches deeper. >>> >>>Junior was never known to be the deeper searcher. >>> >>>It was always known that depth in Junior has a different meaning. >>>depth in shredder8 also has different meaning relative to depth in shredder7.04 >>>because (otherwise Shredder8 could be at least 100 elo stronger than >>>Shredder7.04 based on the difference on their search depth). >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>I realize that Shredder 8 is pruning A LOT more than shredder 7.04, but knowing >>that, the question would be, >> >>who is pruning the most to get the furthest ahead? > >Getting the furthest ahead or deepest is pointless if you fail to see the better >move. Hiarcs with its 'apparently' shallower depth has shown how meaningless ply >depth is more than any top engine IMO. > >When playing with the Pro Deo settings, there are several ways to get it to go a >lot deeper in an equal time, but it often plays much worse, not a little. > > Albert Is Hiarcs 9 the greatest engine for fewest plies (due to common sense and knowledge)? I always used to think very highly of Hiarcs 6 and 7, and they ruled supreme in their time. Maybe they would do so now, if only there were a few other advancements, together with it's already existing talents. S.Taylor
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.