Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:44:40 08/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 16, 2005 at 17:54:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 16, 2005 at 17:46:42, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 16, 2005 at 17:33:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On August 16, 2005 at 17:26:28, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On August 16, 2005 at 17:16:33, Paolo Casaschi wrote: >>>> >>>>>>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. >>>>> >>>>>Do you have any proof or evidence that there is some correlation between blitz >>>>>strenght and slower speed strenght? >>>>>If you dont, then we can only compare assumptions and I tend to agree with Bob >>>>>Hyatt since the same non-correlation is evident with humans and because common >>>>>sense... >>>>> >>>>>--Paolo >>>> >>>>Of course there is correlation. >>>> >>>>Look at every rating list at long time control and you can see Shredder,Fruit >>>>Fritz,Junior,Hiarcs at the top of the list. >>>> >>>>Now look at rating list at blitz. >>>>What do you see? >>>> >>>>Surprise for you >>>>Again the same programs. >>>> >>>>You do not believe it? >>>>Here are 2 rating lists one for blitz and another one for longer time control. >>>> >>>> >>>>http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/rangliste.html >>>>http://www.miko42.de/turniere/blitzturniere/blitzrangliste.html >>>> >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>Did you even look at your data? The programs do _not_ finish in the same order. >> >>Yes but the difference is small. >> >>Fritz is 38 elo better than hiarcs at long time control and 6 elo weaker than >>hiarcs at faster time control. >> >>It is only 44 elo difference. >> >>Uri > > >44 is pretty significant. I'd take a free 44 anytime I could get it. I guess that both figures are within the error bars of the calculations anyway.
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.