Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 03:54:30 07/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 17, 2005 at 06:38:49, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 17, 2005 at 06:30:18, Sandro Necchi wrote: > >>>using books and learning in tests does not help to decide which program is >>>better to use in overnight analysis. >> >>This is correct, but it is also true that some program may be better in some >>positions while worst in others, so it depends on the positions more than on the >>program. > >I agree that it is also dependent on the positions but the candidates to use are >mainly the programs in the top of the CEGT list so I use mainly shredder and >Fruit when the question which program to trust is also dependent on the >position(it may be interesting if the CEGT also produce rating list for >different opening at least based on the first moves and rating list for 1.e4 >e6,1.e4 e5 1.e4 c5 1.d4 Nf6 1.d4 d5 1.d4 f5,... may be also productive) > >Uri Uri, I am not saying that SSDF list is the only thing to use and that gives a reply to all questions for chess programs. I am saying that SSDF list is the best to tell you if a program is better and how much over a previous version. This is the goal of this list and what they choose is based on this result. Of course for specific questions like correspondance games, so not long tournament levels, another system can be better. You say this is CETG, OK you may be correct on this. I have no data to claim something different. 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.