Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:48:14 07/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 2005 at 14:23:39, Thomas Logan wrote: >>>current score >>> >>>THOMAS-KBZT8WLT, 120'/40+60'/20+30' 0 >>> >>> 12345678901234567890123456789012 >>>1 Shredder 9 01010½0½1½1½1½01111½½½½10½0½½001 17.0/32 >>>2 Fruit 2.1 10101½1½0½0½0½10000½½½½01½1½½110 15.0/32 >>> >>> >>>This is a close match >>> >>>At the end of twenty it looked like Shredder was running away with the match >>> >>>since that time however fruit has scored 7-5 against Shredder >>> >>>Tom >> >> >> Hi Tom >> You can now see the first time yourself why it's >> important to have more than 20 games. >> Kurt > >Hi Kurt > >Yeah > >But at classical time control it takes so long > >I hope no one says 50 is too little you need 100 or more 500 is the reasonable lower bound to get a good idea about strength. 1000 is much better and 2000 will give a very good picture. 30 games is only a glimpse of a wild idea about which program is strongest. If you read Ernst Heinz's book, he offers good statistical reasons why 1000 games is a good target. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
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.