Author: Thomas Logan
Date: 11:05:53 07/19/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 2005 at 14:48:14, Dann Corbit wrote: >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. Well the bad news is I do not have the time to play 1000 or even 500 games at classical time control I will play the planned 50 and that can be added to other classical results and perhaps someday that will total up to 1000 Tom Tom
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.