Author: George Tsavdaris
Date: 04:48:31 12/19/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 19, 2005 at 06:42:15, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On December 19, 2005 at 06:34:46, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >> Hi Thorsten >> Good performance of Hiarcs 10 so far. I hope you >> will post the final result after 50 games -:) >> Best regards >> Kurt > >before i continue the match against rybka, i first try out s9, fruit2.2.1 >etc. > >i do not think that after 50 games the results will be any different then now. Oh, you act like a beginner:-) And you certainly are on the completely different side of the beginner's....... >look in some of the games and you will see that hiarcs10 plays superior. >of course i can be wrong. No doubt that Hiarcs 10 play is very strong from what i've seen so far! I can really see that it's an improvement(huge,medium i/we don't know yet) over Hiarcs 9. But i can't in any way, call it superior even on this small 13 games match. It played really superior at 2 games but also at 3 games Rybka played superior too. To be able to call an engine superior over others there is only one safe way: This engine's evaluations over a game, should increase or stay the same from move to move and never have a decrease...... Then the engine will completely outplay other engines and we can call it superior over others..... > >if we want to predict what will happen to s9, i guess it will be a complete >mess for s9 against THIS hiarcs10. > >will it win 1 point ? or lose to sero ? > >you are right. we need more games. > >but it looks convincingly so far. > >i did not play with original books. >with rybka because there is no book that comes with the ß, >and with hiarcs i wanted to avoid the people who post that this result >was due to a killer book. hiarcs9.ctg cannot be a killer book because it was >published BEFORE rybka.
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.