Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Standings

Author: Kurt Utzinger

Date: 23:33:41 02/13/05

Go up one level in this thread


On February 13, 2005 at 22:54:27, Graham Banks wrote:

>On February 13, 2005 at 20:14:21, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>
>>On February 13, 2005 at 13:46:25, Graham Banks wrote:
>>
>>>THE GREAT CM9000 SHOWDOWN!
>>>
>>>Athlon XP1900+
>>>128mb hash each
>>>3,4,5 men tablebases
>>>Ponder on
>>>No opening books
>>>34 rounds (2 cycles) at 40 moves in 80 minutes repeating
>>>
>>>
>>>Standings after Round 1
>>>
>>>1.0	- Mapi
>>>1.0	- Minotaur
>>>1.0	- Pillen
>>>1.0	- Slayer 2b
>>>0.5	- Alliance
>>>0.5	- Assassin
>>>0.5	- Judge
>>>0.5	- Judge II
>>>0.5	- Justice
>>>0.5	- RIX
>>>0.5	- SKR
>>>0.5	- Slayer
>>>0.5	- Surak 8c
>>>0.5	- TO5
>>>0.0	- Gladiator
>>>0.0	- Minotaur 2
>>>0.0	- R1
>>>0.0	- R2
>>
>>
>>Can you also include the original CM9000 without personality, for strength
>>comparison.
>>
>>Jorge
>
>
>That was my plan originally, but somebody requested that I include Gladiator, so
>I left out Default to accommodate this request.
>Everybody knows that Default doesn't hack it with most or all of these settings,
>especially at longer time controls on faster machines.
>Default is included in the 40 moves in 2 hours tournament that I'm running on an
>old P3 450. Even here it's not faring so well! I'll post the result of that
>tournament soon (9 settings, 80 rounds).
>
>Graham.


      This was a wrong decision in my opinion. It could be
      that default plays comparatively stronger vs internal
      CM-settings than vs other engines. I remember my earliest
      tests with CM8k and different settings when default was
      almost best and eventually stronger than most other settings.
      Kurt
      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.