Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 22:59:48 10/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 05, 1999 at 20:26:59, Peter Kappler wrote: >Bob, > >This is really a shame, because Crafty is the best known of all the winboard >engines, and is often used as *the* standard for assessing the strength of other >programs. Anytime I hear that "program X" is a really strong amateur engine, my >first thought is "well, lets just see how it stacks up against Crafty". > >As much as possible, I think you should try to address some of these >single-computer winboard issues - especially the no-ponder time management >problem, which just doesn't seem that difficult. Problems that can't be solved >should at least be quantified, performance-wise, and this information could be >published. As Christopher said in his previous post - if the net effect is 5 or >10 ELO points, who really cares? On the other hand, if you can prove that for >Crafty the difference is 50 or 75 ELO points, then at least people will take >this into account when interpreting results. > >--Peter I am willing to play 100 40/40 auto232 games. PC-1: Rebel Century PB=ON PC-2: Rebel Century PB=OFF Indentical hardware of course. My bet... Expected match score: 70-30 Now how many ELO is that when that score pops up? Ed
This page took 0.02 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.