Author: Joseph Ciarrochi
Date: 03:27:26 01/12/06
Go up one level in this thread
Vasik, I should note that 4 of rybka's beta 9 wins were because the earlier rybka ran out of time in a drawn position. So you seem to have definitely improved time management issues. If we assume that the four flagged games were draws, then the score would be: rybka beta 9 55.5 -44.5 On January 12, 2006 at 06:01:14, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On January 12, 2006 at 05:28:07, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: > >>Ok, i believe you folks when you say that testing an engine against its earlier >>verison does not do a great job of proving that the later engine (9) is >>stronger. Still, for interest sake,....... >> >>5 minute 1 sec blitz >>noomen positions >>Pentium(R) M processor 2.00GHz with 1,023 MB Memory >> >>Rybka beta9 wins 57.5 to 42.5 >> >>Ok, so that is a good start for the newer beta release. I'm guessing there is >>real improvement here, but i can't prove it yet. . Now, to test it against other >>engines . Oh, to have a basement full of computers:() and by the time my one >>poor computer is done, vas will have released another version >> >>best >>Joseph > >Joseph, > >thanks for testing, I've added it to my data table. Indeed Beta 9 is about to >become obsolete, but the data is still very useful. I want to be able to attach >rating differences to the changes which I make, even after I am convinced that >the changes were productive. (Which I now am re. Beta 9.) Search is a very >strange thing and quite often I still guess wrong. > >Vas
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.