Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 13:46:57 02/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 27, 2005 at 14:07:35, Stephen A. Boak wrote: >On February 27, 2005 at 06:57:54, Sandro Necchi wrote: > >>On February 27, 2005 at 06:24:35, Rex wrote: >> >>>On February 27, 2005 at 06:09:15, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>> >>>>On February 27, 2005 at 06:00:06, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 27, 2005 at 05:54:35, Rex wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>With all that was learned out of IPCCC I sure would like a "free" update. >>>>>> >>>>>>Enjoy >>>>> >>>>> I am almost sure that there will be no such update. >>>>> At Paderborn an experimental version of Shredder 9 >>>>> is participating and nobody knows about the real >>>>> playing strength of it. >>>>> Kurt >>>> >>>> >>>>No, we have used the same 9.0 version. >>>> >>>>We only used a modified book for the tournament...an intermediate version for >>>>the next WCCC or match against Hydra hoping someone can arrange it. >>>> >>>>Sandro >>> >>> >>>Nice info Sandro, >>> >>>Everyone assumed that there was some "Special" Shredder Version being played. >> >>No, we did not use a new version as we agreed the 9.0 was more reliable. >> >>>Nice to see Shredder 9 being used. Although there are some concerns that some >>>reviewing the games could not duplicate IPCCC Shredder moves. >> >>This is because it is necessary to modify the book to play tournaments. Still >>they were able to prepare a trap to us (Diep). >>> >>>Were there any special settings Shredder had used other than default? If so >>>could they be posted? >> >>No, std. setting with a different harware. >> >>I think people can be pround they can use/play with the strongest Shredder on >>their computers. >> >>Sandro > >Hi Sandro, > >Excellent job done by you & Stefan in Paderborn! thank you. > >In your several postings, you indicate Shredder 9 (not an experimental version) >was used at Paderborn with standard settings, since it was agreed most stable. No, we used the 9.0 version as it has been tested more and we consider it reliable. A new version may be not so, so better to use a version that has been tested enough. We have released a new version very recently, so we do not have something new tested enough. > >Yet you also indicate the Shredder 9, as used, was 'buggy', since certain >routines regardig piece exchanges and sacrifices were disabled accidentally. No, Shredder 9 commercial version is not buggy. Shredder 8.x was buggy and the bug was removed before releasing the new commercial version. Unfortunately we played the WCCC 2004 and the match against Hydra with a buggy experimental version. > >Are you saying that my recently purchased and downloaded Shredder UCI version >has those 'bugs' in it? No, the commercial version is the best we couls released and we are pround of this new commercial version. > >Are you saying that my purchased S9 version is not as strong as it could be, due >to a bug? See above. > >Are you saying that my S9 home version, if used on a quad processor as in >Paderborn will play the same moves, generally speaking, as Shredder vs Hydra in >that Tournament? See above. > >Does that mean a free upgrade is forthcoming, to fix the bug? Since there is no bug anymore there is no need of a fix. > >I don't understand your potentially conflicting comments. I do not understand what you do not understand. Pls. explain. > >Thanks in advance for a more full explanation, I hope now it is clear. > >--Steve Sandro
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.