Author: Uri Blass
Date: 19:57:56 02/25/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 25, 2006 at 21:33:17, Tony Thomas Karippa wrote: >On February 25, 2006 at 21:20:15, Tony Thomas Karippa wrote: > >>On February 25, 2006 at 19:20:36, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On February 25, 2006 at 18:51:15, Tony Thomas Karippa wrote: >>> >>>>On February 25, 2006 at 18:22:19, George Tsavdaris wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 25, 2006 at 18:14:20, Tony Thomas Karippa wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 25, 2006 at 17:50:25, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On February 25, 2006 at 17:25:05, Tony Thomas Karippa wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Why are you so surprises? Yes, I know it was a connection problem, but Zappa >>>>>>>>isnt weaker than fruit, at least not when running on a quad. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We do not know it because nobody can test zappa on a quad against latest fruit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>Didnt Zappa ran on a quad in WCCC 2005 and in Leiden?? >>>>> >>>>>Do you call one game against Fruit testing......? >>>>>Also that Fruit played there, was not the latest.... >>>>Dont bring that argument, Zappa wasnt the latest either. >>> >>>It is another reason that we cannot compare the levels between zappa and fruit. >>>It is possible that previous zappa is better than fruit but latest zappa is >>>weaker than fruit. >>> >>> The last three times >>>>they played against each other Zappa one twice and draw one game. Isnt that >>>>clear evidence that they are on the same level to say the least. >>> >>>No >>>player a1 beated player b1 >>>player a2 beated player b2 >>>player a3 drew with player b3 >>> >>>Is it an evidecne that player a4 is at least in the same level as player b4? >>>No. >>> >>>We simply do not know. >>>We did not claim that zappa is weaker than fruit and of course we have no >>>evidence for that. >>> >>>You claimed that zappa ia not weaker than fruit and we criticized this claim >>>because you also have no evidence for that. >>> >>>Uri >>No no no, that isnt the case >>1)player a1 defeated player b1 >>2)player a1 defeated player b1 >>3)the next game was a draw >>I dont see why you are using different names for the same engines(Based on >>versions?) >>To me its enough evidence to say that they are within the same elo range. When >>was the last time Fruit won a major tournament?? Have you seen the elo list >>posted by Jouni Uski?? It indicated that Zappa is one of the top engines. Also >>Zappa has the advantage of the hardware. >In case you missed it here is the link >http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?488168 >I heard that the new Movei is stronger than Fruit, when do we get to test it?? >:-) :-) I can promise you that the new movei is stronger than fruit1.0 I thought to release it next week after seeing some positive results but at this point of time I am disappointed by it's rating in the CEGT list so I decided not to release it. I already sent a new version to the CEGT(352) but I am not sure if it is strong enough to be released. I believe that there is a room for improvement of more than 50 elo by changing parameters. I decided to document every parameter that is possible to change and explain exactly it's meaning and hopefully it may help me to discover some bugs and fix them and make the thing stronger. there are parameters that I programmed a long time ago and I do not remember their exact meaning. 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.