Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:15:38 06/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 1999 at 17:51:59, Andrew Dados wrote: >On June 28, 1999 at 16:38:15, James T. Walker wrote: > >>On June 28, 1999 at 11:00:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On June 28, 1999 at 09:57:20, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>On June 28, 1999 at 01:27:53, blass uri wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>On June 27, 1999 at 16:43:59, Mark Young wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 27, 1999 at 15:49:53, odell hall wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Hi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am thinking about setting up a computer account on ICC? Does anyone know >>>>>>>Which Program would do the best? If the choice was between Genius 5 , hiarcs6, >>>>>>>Mchess 8 or Genius 3? I have heard that Genius 5 is the Best a blitz chess >>>>>>>(game/15) is this still true. What program would tear the crafty clone Data to >>>>>>>shreds!! (incredibly strong data is!) Or should I just go out and purchase >>>>>>>Chessmaster 6000 to do the Job? >>>>>> >>>>>>The best results I have had is with Hiarcs 7.01. I have not had a chance to play >>>>>>7.32 online because of the testing I am running now. I most likely will only >>>>>>test Hiarcs 7.32 against humans online, after testing Hiarcs 7.01 online against >>>>>>other computers its left a bad taste in my mouth. I try to test against the best >>>>>>programs online and play a set amount of games, but with Hiarcs 7 this became >>>>>>almost impossible because of the high winning percentage Hiarcs 7 was >>>>>>generating. The automatic programs would no play me, or change the time formula >>>>>>to only play 0 inc games in the middle of my testing, and some of the other >>>>>>manuale computer operators were no better. Rating protection in online play is >>>>>>only getting worse, and thats to bad because it was a nice tool to use in the >>>>>>evaluation of chess programs. >>>>> >>>>>I do not understand it. >>>>>I think that programmers should prefer to play against strong opponents because >>>>>they can learn from the games that they lose to improve their programs. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>He is not talking about programmers. >>>> >>>>bruce >>> >>> >>>Bruce, myself, Stanback, Ban, plus the usual cast of the "under 2600 club" here >>>play on ICC and do just what you suggest. But we are a tiny bit of the total >>>number of computers playing there. There are dozens of Fritz, Hiarcs, shredder, >>>and so forth (not to mention crafty, comet, tcb, etc) that are run by _others_. >>>And _they_ are not working on improving their programs. Many work only to >>>improve their 'rating' which is a point I don't understand. >> >>He may be talking about programmers. If the shoe fits, wear it. Programmers >>are not immune from the action he is talking about. There seems to be a rating >>point contest on ICC and programmers seem to be caught up in this action too. >>It seems like programmers can't separate their egos from their programs either. >>There are many childish "games" being played on ICC with computer accounts. I >>run a computer account on ICC as a hobby. I enjoy watching the different >>programs play each other. It is a long time hobby of mine that goes back to my >>first two chess computers (Chess Challenger 10 vs Sargon 2.5). I can play Fritz >>vs Crafty at home but I don't have a "Quad Xeon" so I don't get the same quality >>of play I would get if I get a chance to play Fritz/Hiarcs vs Crafty. So I enjoy >>the games on the Internet. And If I get a chance to watch a GM / IM play >>Fritz/Hiarcs it's a real treat for me! That's what I get out of running a >>computer account. And Bob, I got to tell you, your words ring a little hollow >>on this point. I'm still on the Crafty "Noplay" list and my only "Crime" is >>that I played 5 games vs Crafty. This after I explained, that there was nothing >>in your notes about this and it was just a misunderstanding. Is this your way >>of protecting your rating points? >>I, like the above poster, was under the impression that programmers would like >>to test their programs against top level competition to look for flaws. I would >>think you would learn more from one loss vs Fritz than winning 16 of 17 vs a FM. >> I thought it would be better if the progams were actually playing chess rather >>than just sitting idle waiting for a GM / IM to come along. Apparently I was >>wrong. > > Waitasecond! What GM wants to play, say, crafty clone rated 2700 when he can >play 'same' program on similar hardware, but rated 2850? :))) Remember Bob >complaining about other clones taking good players away from crafty? Then he >brought quad xeon... > So it's not only a 'rating contest'... it's also a 'attractiveness to titled >players' contest...imo > -Andrew- No doubt about it. For the last 2 weeks or so Crafty has been between 3050 and 3150 all the time. And it has averaged 35 GM games per 24 hours. With GM players such as Kamsky, Sierawan, one several claim is Nunn, not to mention my good friend Roman. If it drops to 2800, forget it, because they _know_ it is bad odds at that rating. But at 3150, with the best of those GM players rated at maybe 2900, all they have to do is win one of every 6 games or so and they gain rating points. GM's are definitely good at math. :) >>Jim Walker
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.