Author: greg moller
Date: 13:15:06 06/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 25, 1999 at 15:39:39, Will Singleton wrote: > >On June 25, 1999 at 15:20:30, greg moller wrote: > >>On June 25, 1999 at 13:50:16, Will Singleton wrote: >> >>> >>>On June 25, 1999 at 13:09:04, Lawrence S. Tamarkin wrote: >>> >>>>I thought a fictitious Harvard Cup would involve picking which humans & >>>>computer's would be in it, basing it on the setup that was traditionally used in >>>>past Harvard cup events. >>>> >>>>My picks would be, >>>> >>>>Human's: Playing programs: >>>> >>>>1. Benjamin 1.Shredder (of course) >>>> >>>>2. Rohde 2.Fritz5 >>>> >>>>3. Christiansen 3.Hiarcs7.32 >>>> >>>>4. Yermolinsky 4.Nimzo99 (or 2000) >>>> >>>>5. Fedorowicz 5.CM6000 (of of course) >>>> >>>>6. Gulko 6.CS Tal II for Windows (A real wild card) >>>> >>>> >>>>mrslug - the chess software addict! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>Re your choice of CSTal, my results indicate it's about as strong as my program, >>>perhaps a bit stronger. This is from ICC blitz play. What indication do you >>>have that it belongs anywhere near the top programs? >>> >>>Will >> >>In Thorsten's _slow_ tournaments Cstal has shown relative strength comparable to >>all the top programs. Of course, due to its provocative style there's no reason >>to think it won't do even better against humans. >> >>ICC blitz play is a poor indicator OTOH, IMO. :) >> >>regards, >>gm > >Probably. But then, how do you explain the fact that of the 4 CStal accounts on >ICC (that I know about), none of them has a high standard score? All of their >scores are less than their blitz scores, way less than top rated computers, and >either about the same as mine or less? (talmoves, master-tal, redbear, cstalx) > >Would also be nice to see the results of some independent testing, perhaps Shep >is doing so? > >Will All I can say is that "standard" games on ICC start at 15 min for the whole game and very rarely go over 1 hour/game. So basically all you get is something similar to "action" chess, and by no means the serious 40/2 hours stuff. CStal, being the slowest searcher, benefits the most from the slower/longer time controls. Another thing I've noticed about the CStal accounts on ICC is that very few are faster than PII300 hardware-wise, so that's another disadavantage, considering the hardware speed of the top rated programs there. To draw proper conclusions, we definitely need more proper testing IMO. regards, gm
This page took 0.01 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.