Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 00:08:10 03/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 21, 2005 at 18:33:45, Mark Young wrote: >On March 21, 2005 at 16:51:17, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On March 21, 2005 at 12:53:56, Roger D Davis wrote: >> >>>On March 21, 2005 at 12:06:31, Vincent Lejeune wrote: >>> >>>>On March 21, 2005 at 11:52:47, Roger D Davis wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 21, 2005 at 11:32:38, Vincent Lejeune wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>http://hydrachess.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>>"The developers expect to break the 3000 Elo barrier till the end of this year. >>>>>>" is quite clear. >>>>>>A video (19 min duration) with a quick history of computer chess and history of >>>>>>hydra's games. >>>>>>hydra games + some pictures + hydra informations >>>>>> >>>>>>great ! >>>>> >>>>>Since ELOs are meaningful only within some reference group...what is the >>>>>reference group? The top SSDF programs running on AMD 1200s, I guess...right? >>>> >>>>I suppose they mean "an estimated strengh of 3000 human elo" and they will try >>>>to play more games against humans, but it's only a guess. >>> >>>I guess I have to wonder what Hydra's performance rating would be against SSDF >>>rated programs. There are some Shredder, Gandalf, and Tiger games listed in its >>>tournament history. >> >>It is clear that Hydra is very strong. But there are not enough published games >>to verify anything meaningful. And there are basically no games by indepenent >>testers (who do not care about the outcome). >> >>The 3000 number is pulled out of a hat to sound impressive. It means nothing. >> >>Of course, they can say anything they want: >>"We think it is 200 Elo stronger than Kasparov" >>or >>"We think it is 200 Elo stronger than Deep Blue" >> >>And it might or might not be thost things. But without lots of data from >>independent testers, we will never know the answers. >> >>Still, it's fun to guess and there is nothing wrong with that. >> >>And I do not blame the Hydra team for hype. Each and every professional chess >>program has huge volumes of hype connected with them. It's just the nature of >>how things are sold. > >I don't mind hype either, but they did make some errors in the video. Like >saying Hydra beat GM Topalov. When in fact it was Fritz that beat GM Topalov. >They also said no program attacks from the center like Hydra. What does this >mean? And the video said Hydra has a big advantage over other programs because >of it's strong opening moves? Pure nonsense The video also said Hydra proved itself the >strongest chess engine in the world...by drawing GM Topalov?? Pure nonsense again > >Hydra maybe the best program in the world. I don't know. I do know where Hydra >claimed it proved itself the best program. Fritz had a better performance and on >much slower hardware then Hydra. And Fritz did beat GM Topalov where Hydra drew >the game with GM Topalov. Hydra was even very lucky to drew this game. Michael > >Man vs Machine 120'/40+60' 2004 > > 1 2 3 4 5 6 >1 Fritz xxxx ** 1 ½ 11 3.5/4 4.00 >2 Hydra xxxx ** ½ 11 1 3.5/4 3.75 >3 Topalov,Veselin 2757 -645 0 ½ ** ½½ 1.5/4 3.25 >4 Deep Junior xxxx ½½ ** ½ 0 1.5/4 2.00 >5 Ponomariov,Ruslan 2710 -700 ½ 00 ½ ** 1.0/4 2.50 >6 Karjakin,Sergey 2576 -566 00 0 1 ** 1.0/4 1.50 > >Average elo: 2440 <=> Category: 8 >gm = 7.30 m = 5.30
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.