Author: blass uri
Date: 17:05:04 06/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 1999 at 06:58:23, Harald Faber wrote: >On June 21, 1999 at 06:07:13, blass uri wrote: > >>I do not complain about the fact that shredder is first. >>I only said that Junior deserves a better place(I did not say first place) > >This is always a problem with only few rounds. IMO Sonneborn-Berger at least >gives some better look at detail. But it only helps for same points. > >>I have not enough data to be sure about nothing but I believe (based on the >>results of the tournaments and the games that I saw) that shredder is better >>than Deep Junior inspite of the hardware advantage of Deep Junior. > >That is what has to be proved now. > >>I believe based on my data(again I have not enough data to be sure about >>nothing) that Junior made an improvement of more than 40 ssdf rating points(if >>we do not include the hardware improvement) but it is probably not enough to be >>better than shredder4. >>Uri > >You mean Junior or Junior+hardware makes a plus of 40pts? I mean that Junior without hardware makes a plus of more than 40pts with hardware it may be +100 pts or +120 pts but it is probably not enough because my impression is that shredder4 did a progress of 150 pts relative to shredder3. 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.