Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 04:12:29 11/08/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 2005 at 05:42:08, Uri Blass wrote:
>On November 08, 2005 at 05:24:09, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>
>>On November 08, 2005 at 03:12:20, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On November 08, 2005 at 02:01:56, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 08, 2005 at 01:39:25, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On November 07, 2005 at 13:32:29, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think I have improved Columbus' egg 9g with the latest 9L (Lyon) version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I am testing it against "Fritz friend" (Fritz 9) at 90 minutes game on 2 equal
>>>>>>AMD XP 3000+, so similar to SSDF on A1200
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Columbus' egg 9L + Shrddr10.bkt prc (preliminary c version) - Fritz 9 = 7 - 4
>>>>>>(+5, =4, -2) 63.6% TP = +97 Elo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>P.N.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. Shredder10 prc is in std. mode, so not the strongest mode!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>2. The improvements on Columbus' egg 9L are mainly strategical in the first
>>>>>>part/middle game as the new settings are more refined.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If this version will score very well after several games I will post the
>>>>>>settings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ciao
>>>>>>Sandro
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Sandro
>>>>> You are very courageous to conclude something
>>>>> out of 11 games only. In our Fruit 2.2.1 test
>>>>> Fritz 9 lost in the first 10 games with 2,0-8,0
>>>>> but was almost equal after 50 games. In my
>>>>> Nunn2 match, Fritz 9 won the first serie vs
>>>>> Fruit 2.2.1 with 8,0-2,0 only to loose the
>>>>> second serie with 3,0-7,0 and from such experience
>>>>> I can't take matches under 50 games seriously. A
>>>>> further good examply of how things can go/vary
>>>>> to be seen at my comments re our RK 2004 tournament
>>>>> http://www.utzingerk.com/rk_2004_english.htm
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Kurt
>>>>
>>>>Hi Kurt,
>>>>
>>>>sorry but I said "I think", not I am sure. So you cannot say that I concluded
>>>>something, however I made several tests before starting the match looking this
>>>>setting on several positions, so I was not relying on this score, but on a
>>>>overall judgement.
>>>
>>>Did you look at games from CEGT?
>>>I guess that the games can give you productive knowledge about the mistakes of
>>>colombus egg 9g so the question is if you found that the new setting can avoid
>>>significant part of the mistakes of 9g
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>
>> Hi Uri
>> You are surely aware that testing is a very
>> hard job. If a new setting can avoid the
>> mistakes of 9g this does not necessarily
>> mean that the new setting will not produce
>> other - so far not known - mistakes -:)
>> Regards
>> Kurt
>
>I know it but I think that good testing should start from mistakes of previous
>personality because if it even does not avoid significant part of the mistakes
>of previous personality the chances that it is going to be better is very small.
>
>My opinion is that playing games should be only last part and not first part
>when you think that you may have an improvement.
>
>Uri
Hi Uri
As far as I can see we have different opinions
here. From my own experience with many CM-settings,
I would tend to say that the "correctness" of a new
setting is more reliable if tested with many games
than by (only) finding better/stronger test moves.
Regards
Kurt
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.