Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:09:08 09/17/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 17, 1999 at 15:40:13, Ralf Elvsén wrote: >I have played a number of 40/2-games vs Hiarcs and Crafty. >My impression this far is that if they perform over a rating of 2000 it >is not by a huge margin... one thing I did fail to mention... if you use the 'rating command' it will adjust the contempt factor (AKA draw score) accordingly, so that if it is rated higher than you, it will struggle much harder before repeating. If you don't set this, it assumes you are exactly the same rating as it is, and draws are easier. On chess servers, this is an xboard/winboard function that is automatically done... > >Before I discovered the "Rated"-function in the ChessBase-interface >I played 1 draws out of 4 vs Hiarcs and 2 draws out of 5 vs Crafty. >One of these draws can be "questioned" (see comments), because >of the contempt value and there was one game where Hiarcs refused >to move and technically lost :). > >Now I have also played two "rated" games vs Hiarcs and lost one >and got one draw. I think I never would get away with these results >against a human solidly rated above 2000. (4 draws out of 11 games). >I haven't been active for 18(!) years and then my (swedish) rating >was slightly below 1700. If I'm not mistaken the rating performance >difference between me and the programs is 265 rating points... > >If you don't think this is interesting, move on to another post and please >excuse me for wasting your time. If you think that it sounds strange that a >player of my calibre can draw this many times, you will probably >question these games. > >Let me try to draw the attention away from winning percentages and >performance ratings. You can think whatever you like about games played >at home, presented in non-verifiable pgs:s. What you can do, >however, is to check that the moves I claim is played by the programs, >are authentic in the sense that they are top or near-the-top in >the movelist (if you own a copy of these programs of course). >Then ask yourself: what is the quality of the chess played? >If you think it is above 2000, I would like to see your arguments. > >If you don't belive in the games or take the principal standpoint >to never pay attention to games like these, please spare me your opinion >since I understand you. Note: I don't "claim" anything, I just want some >opinions on the chess played by the programs. Is it 2000+ or not? > >It seems that you get what you ask for from the programs. If you >try to push them and win, they are tigers, if you play like I do >they can have clear problems to find something to "bite" at. > >In a "reply" to this post I give the pgn:s for the draws and one loss. >I have been completely honest about everything, no takebacks or cheating. >And it is the chess, not the result I want comments on. > >Warning: it is mostly ugly boring drawish chess, except for the last >game maybe, which may have some entertainment value. > >Regards, Ralf
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.