Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:34:40 02/16/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2006 at 17:58:27, Chessfun wrote: >On February 16, 2006 at 09:22:43, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On February 16, 2006 at 06:21:57, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >> >>>On February 15, 2006 at 10:20:18, Zappa wrote: >>> >>>>So I dropped by to see how my old buddies in CCC were doing, and found a massive >>>>flamewar :) This is far more to my liking than dry test results, so I thought >>>>I'd weigh in with a few comments. >>>> >>>>The majority of members in CCC seem to be unable to think rationally about >>>>Rybka. I saw the following argument about 500X: "Vasik is violating the >>>>charter" "But Rybka is so awesome". Clearly this is complete idiocy. The law >>>>is intended to apply to everyone equally, regardless of whether or not they have >>>>an awesome engine. >>>> >>>>I left (and this is not a coming back post) because I didn't like reading tons >>>>of testing posts. However, the majority of people here appear to like it here. >>>> From what I read in the flamewar Skinner seems correct that Vasik violated the >>>>charter, but perhaps rather than crucifying Vasik (or Skinner), the charter >>>>should be amended so the club serves the interest of the majority. It really >>>>seems like the majority of people don't mind his "commerical posts" - so what's >>>>the problem? >>>> >>>>I also read Enrico's post on Rybka's nodecount. Vasik claimed it was the result >>>>of a bug. I read that as "my node count obfuscation algorithm has a bug and >>>>will be fixed posthaste". If you look at Enrico's numbers, its obvious that >>>>Rybka is really searching at 2-3M+ nps on big hardware. >>>> >>>>So, Vasik, please tell me: why would you would want to hide the node count of >>>>Rybka? >>>> >>>>anthony >>> >>> >>>Interesting post. And very telling. Demands some kind of reply, at least from >>>a curious member of the CCC (but surely not from Vasik, as the question you ask >>>is rather impertinent and irrelevant for the masses): why wouldn't you, >>>Anthony, want to release your program so that Chrilly Donninger might try his >>>disassembling skills on Zappa as he did with Rybka? A reminder for you: the >>>verdict was that Rybka had no other program's code in it... >> >>Actually i do have a few zappa world champs 2005 version here. >> >>It's not even close to Fruit. Evaluation of Rybka is very close to Fruit. He >>added some and lobotomized other things. >> >>Zappa's evaluation is totally different from fruit. >> >>I am for example debugging a position here from a testgame from diep. >>Where Diep says here +2.3 for white, Zappa says +1.0. Rybka says 0.1 there and >>Fruit also says 0.1 there. > >As this table shows other engines like Spike 1.0 and SmarThink are far closer to >Fruit than Rybka. As for Toga the numbers speak for themselves. > >http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/chess/CCRL-4040/engine-distance-table-all.shtml > >Sarah.3.62 Why to confuse Vincent with facts Smallest numbers 1.78 fruit2.2-Toga1.1(1076 moves) 2.17 CM magic-Gandalf6(77 moves) 2.22 Ktulu7.1-Ktulu7.5(790 moves) 2.32 Deep Junior9-Junior9(1146 moves) 2.50 Deep Shredder9-Shredder9(549 moves) 3.08 spike1.0a-smarthink1(67 moves) 3.23 Hiarcs10-Chesstiger15(98 moves) 3.55 Rybak1.032 bit-chesstiger 15(57 moves) 3.62 Junior9-CM magic(155 games) 3.67 Fritz9-Deep-Fritz8(1722 games) Uri
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.