Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 10:35:18 01/11/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2006 at 12:53:02, Peter Skinner wrote: >On January 11, 2006 at 10:15:12, stuart taylor wrote: > >>Sandro has been making it absolutely clear, that the minimum aim is to make it >>atleast 50 elo above the best, which is Rybka, and Rybka will yet be better. So >>Shredder 10 would HAVE to be, without exageration, a clear 150 elo points better >>than now, easily. (or, 150-200) >>S.Taylor > >Sandro has also make it absolutely clear that each of the previous versions were >a certain elo better than the previous and that just didn't end up being true. Peter, sorry but you are VERY superficial AND WRONG with this statement: 1. Shredder 8 was stronger than Shreder 9 if tested in UCI version which SSDF did not and using a more updated book which was not available with the CB version. Now I was telling 40-50 points stronger than 7.04 UCI as 25 being for the UCI and the updated book. 2. This score was the one that was seen by whom tested the UCI version and reported here too. 3. I also mentioned that these were estimated data as I did not have time enough to make very many test games...now after some years the difference between 7.04 UCI and 8.0 CB is 4 points which added to 25 makes 29 so not so far away from what I reported...11 points are not so much as you cannot see them in the games... 4. For Shredder 9 I was talking about 30 points as estimation even if I said that I did not want to tell this data. Now considering that this engine has been the leader for so long and that everybody tested against it it is clear that the actual elo is suffering from this. So, since it is 13 points now I think my estimation was quite good! > >Now suddenly Shredder is going to be 150 - 200elo stronger than version 9? LOL! You need to understand that this for us is a must and not advertisement...I did not say we have the program already 150 points stronger or 200, but that we are working a lot on it to reach that goal... Do you find anything claimed wrong on this? > >I will bet against that anyday. You are going to loose all you have one day, so my suggestion is to think more before making those statements!:-)) > >If you believe this hype, I have a bridge to sell you. And yes it is the one I >have previously sold several times here :) Who says it can't have more than one >owner? :) Pls. take note that we will sell you the bridge connecting Sicily if we reach the goal we are working on and you will have to buy it as you esposed yourself to the world with this claim!:-) Seriously speaking everybody can state anything, but if you claim about false statements on someone you need to be clear and precise otherwise everybody will be laughing at you and this is also not deserved by someone which has devoted so much time to this field as only very few people did not only from a time spent but also as seriously talking on it. > >Peter Sandro
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.