Author: Vasik Rajlich
Date: 04:10:30 01/12/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2006 at 06:27:26, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: >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 > Thanks, yes that's the right score to use. My own score is now 92:78, although it's with a slightly different Beta 9(b). Vas > > > > > >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.