Author: eric guttenberg
Date: 05:10:11 07/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
I'm sorry, I don't want to get into an exchange of unpleasantries but I think you are mistaken here. We are looking at the same posts I believe. The posts that show Hiarcs winning are all engine v engine in one computer and there is a lot of evidence that these results simply are not reliable in determining which is the stronger; in the results obtained when each program plays on a separate but equal computer the results are very different. Look at Jim Walker's results where in 200 games at g/5, 40 games at g/15 and 10 games at tournament times, F5.32 leads H7.32 in each category. Do you recall any posts that show H7.32 leading F5.32 in computer v computer games? The reliability of engine v engine tests to determine playing strength has been discussed before on this site many times. That is what I mean when I say the results are dubious and prove nothing. Tania's engine v engine posts between these two programs fairly consistently showed H7.332 better by about 200 elo points. I don't think anyone really believes that. Hiarcs ability to "ponder" in engine v engine seems to skewer the results. I am sure there is a lot of value to engine v engine tests, but at least between these two programs, not to determine relative playing strength. eric
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.