Author: Heinz van Kempen
Date: 00:05:36 02/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2006 at 00:00:28, Chessfun wrote: >On February 12, 2006 at 19:04:55, Heinz van Kempen wrote: > >>On February 12, 2006 at 17:20:31, Ray Banks wrote: > >>>http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/chess/CCRL-4040/rating-table-all.shtml > >>>We currently have a difference of 42 ELO Rybka 64 bit vs 32 bit. Our time >>>control is more than twice as long as CEGT though, and that could have an >>>impact. Plus our volume of games is fairly low so the statistical error is >>>somewhat higher unfortunately :-( > >>As we have totally different concepts and because of the history all this has >>had I would suggest to avoid any comparison between our groups, at least from >>CCRL people. We did not do this from our side and it would be fair that you also >>avoid it. > >There was no comparison between groups made, simply a statement of fact. > >Sarah This also referred to some remarks by you over the past days in a discussion with Uri, etc.. So it was not a request to Ray alone, but a general request to all CCRL testers to finally stop mentioning CEGT. It is okay when other people do it, they can of course compare CEGT and CCRL and there will be fans for the one and for the other and maybe even for both. But you are involved, like me, so just please avoid certain ways of comments.
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.