Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Crosstable

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 13:44:26 08/16/05

Go up one level in this thread


On August 16, 2005 at 16:33:36, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On August 16, 2005 at 16:14:37, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On August 16, 2005 at 16:05:39, Ingo Althofer wrote:
>>
>>>On August 16, 2005 at 15:57:30, Gerd Isenberg wrote:
>>>>                      1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8
>>>>1. Shredder    6      x    1    1    0    1    1    1    1
>>>>2. Zappa       5      0    x    1    0    1    1    1    1
>>>>3. Junior      4.5    0    0    x    1    1    1/2  1    1
>>>>4. Fruit       4.5    1    1    0    x    1    1    0    1/2
>>>>5. Crafty      2.5    0    0    0    0    x    1    1/2  1
>>>>6. Diep        2.5    0    0    1/2  0    0    x    1    1
>>>>7. Jonny       1.5    0    0    0    1    1/2  0    x    0
>>>>8. Deep Sjeng  1.5    0    0    0    1/2  0    0    1    x
>>>
>>>Hello Gerd,
>>>
>>>thanks for the full information.
>>>
>>>Congratulations to Stefan for winning the Blitz title.
>>>Good luck for you for the remaining round of the WCCC!
>>>
>>>Ingo.
>>
>>congratulation for stefan and congratulation for fruit for scoring more than
>>Crafty and showing that number of processors is not the only important thing.
>>
>>It seems that fruit one processor is not weaker than Crafty 8 processors based
>>on the results.
>>
>>I wonder if there were time losses because of bad operators.
>>
>>Uri
>
>
>Your logic is sometimes horrible.  Blitz is not normal chess.  If you think it
>is, you are _sadly_ mistaken.  I watched IM Mike Valvo give 1-5 time odds to GM
>players and beat 'em at blitz.  But not OTB in standard time controls...

I understood from another post that you say that Crafty is not tuned for blitz
because of some reasons.

I understand the reason of the parallel search but I still need to see example
for significant different results between blitz and long time control for
programs without bugs.

I know that usually when program improve they improve in all time controls.
I do not know of evaluation changes or search changes that make programs weaker
at blitz but stronger at long time control.

In thoery it can happen but I need to see a proof for it and I believe that
fabien mainly test in blitz time control(he can correct me if I am wrong)
because usually productive changes in blitz of adding knowledge to the
evaluation are also productive at long time control.

Uri



This page took 0.01 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.