Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 23:13:50 03/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 16, 2005 at 21:35:03, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>On March 16, 2005 at 21:29:47, Jason Kent wrote:
>
>>On March 16, 2005 at 20:52:14, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>>
>>>On March 16, 2005 at 20:26:31, Jason Kent wrote:
>>>
>>>>>The Default is doing better than four settings :-)
>>>>
>>>>Which is hardly an accomplishment at all. :))
>>>
>>>They work hard to make CM9000 worse than the Default :-))
>>>
>>>Jorge
>>
>>The ones below default might do worse in this test, but better in others.
>>Default is never a "top" setting. In fact, I believe some of the better
>>settings like R1, and Slayer2b, will beat default in any match, given enough
>>games.
>
>Probably at fast time control, but so far the Default is proving otherwise :-)
>
>Jorge
For me it's absolutely of no interest to know/see which
is the strongest CM9-setting when playing each other. The
only thing and question is how well a CM9-setting is doing
vs non CM9-engines. And in this respect I do not think that
Graham's test will be able to prove anything. The winner of
this tournament will most probably not be the best setting
vs non CM9-engines.
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.