Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 19:01:58 08/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 11, 1999 at 13:17:38, Ralf Elvsén wrote: >On August 11, 1999 at 08:35:52, blass uri wrote: > >>On August 11, 1999 at 05:59:25, Ralf Elvsén wrote: >> >>>Hi there >>> >>>Here is a game I won against Hiarcs 7.32 (pgn below). >>>Mighty proud to have fair and square defeated the "superstrong" >>>Hiarcs, I looked at the game in analysis mode, but on a different >>>computer and now I am perplexed... >>> >>>The game was played on computer A (see below). When analyzing on >>>computer B I noticed that the analysis is much faster on B, much >>>more than I would expect from the hardware. What is even more >>>strange is that the evaluation of the position on the two computers >>>are sometimes very different. Computer A is much more pessimistic. >>>For instance, after 14. Kh1 Hiarcs played 14 ... Bd7 in the game >>>with an eval of 0.61 (positive good for white = me) after search >>>to depth 10. On comp B the eval is around equality and Bd7 is move >>>nr 4 in the analysis candidate list after depth 10, eval = 0.00. >> >>My hiarcs on p200 got Bd7 0.61 9/27,0.68/10/30 >>I stopped it after more than 10 minutes and did not give it to finish iteration >>10. >>I suspect that the results of hiarcs on computer B are based on learning from >>the game that it lost. >> >>Uri > >Hi Uri > >Eehh... Your reply still leaves me wondering. When you look at the game, Hiarcs >play is almost pathetic. I still have a "feel" that Hiarcs underperformed. And >look at the big difference in search depth on move 14 between the two machines >(10 vs 12 in about the same time). But I don't know much about how Hiarcs search >works. Maybe its not so predictable as e.g. Craftys. > >I'll wait with the celebrations a while. Btw, I _have_ lost to Hiarcs :) >These losses would be even more depressing if something was wrong >with the machine or the settings... > >I'll dig in to this some more if the game isn't rejected/verified by some >enlightened posters (other than yourself of course). > > Thanks for your answer, Ralf -------- Hi Ralf, I also have Hiarcs7.32 and i thought it was suspicious play by Hiarcs, so i deceided to play the game from the beginning and played your side of the board. I tried to duplicate how much time that you used for each move to allow Hiarcs to think on my time as it did in your game. Starting with blacks move 16....Be8, my Hiarcs plays Ne8. Well, i take this move back & force it to play 16...Be8 as in your game and proceed until i reach another disagreement from your game on blacks move 19...Nb4. My Hiarcs makes the move for black on move 19...Nf8 (0.61)10/29. I didn`t analyse these 2 moves so i can`t say that they are better but it will give you some other ideas about your game with Hiarcs. I'am using a AMD K6-2/266Mhz with 64 Ram. Hash tables = 45Mb. For these 2 move differences, i even let it analyse for a longer time to compensate for our speed differences,but it still didn't make any difference! Let me know if you find the problem or the answer to this! Good luck! Regards,Terry Regards,Terry
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.