Author: Joseph Ciarrochi
Date: 12:11:24 01/17/06
Go up one level in this thread
I find it difficult to empircally demonstrate that programs differ in their relative ranking, depending on time (not including time controls below 4 minutes mind you, where wierd stuff does happen). Ponder is kind of like increasing time to think. For example, the cegt blitz ratings correlate .99 with the CEGT longer time controls. I would love to see evidence of changes in rank due to differences is ponder or time. maybe hiarcs 10 hyper modern is a candidate for being better at blitz. e.g., check out its standard rating (http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/cegtrating4040all.html) versus its blitz rating (http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/eloblitzall.html) Fruit, in contrast, may be a little weaker in blitz. best Joseph On January 17, 2006 at 14:29:48, James T. Walker wrote: >On January 17, 2006 at 14:14:45, Eduard Nemeth wrote: > >>SSDF will Toga not test, CSS too. >> >>But other serious testers tests Toga II 1.1 ! >> >>Thank You! >> >>Here (Toga at time on place 2!): >> >>http://www.utzingerk.com/rating_list.htm >> >>And here: >> >>http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/cegtrating4040best.html >> >>Toga II 1.1 all in all very good place on Single processor! >> >>(German: Dual Resultate sollte man löschen da sie das Resultat verfälschen!) >> >>Congrats Thomas Gaksch! >> >>ED. > >Sorry but I don't trust "Ponder off" matches. In my opinion you are disabling >an important part of the engine which is used when the author "tunes" the >engine. Just my opinion though. Also backed up by the data in my database >which shows Toga II is weaker than Fruit. >Jim
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.