Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 14:23:23 10/10/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 10, 1999 at 17:13:24, pete wrote:
>On October 10, 1999 at 16:05:45, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On October 10, 1999 at 15:49:09, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>>
>>>On October 10, 1999 at 15:35:53, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>>
>>>>It is not very active, it likes to play cat and mouse without doing much until
>>>>it sees something in the search, but it is very efficient.
>>>
>>>I do have a different opinion. the games i get are different from yours.
>>>tiger plays in all games very active and having initiative.
>>>it forces the wins. it makes the game.-
>>>do you test a different program ?
>>>older tiger versions were passive. not 11.2 and not 12.0.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I start thinking of
>>>>it as the opposite of CST in every way.
>>>
>>>??
>>>
>>>
>>>>I guess that if someone likes CST or
>>>>Mchess won't like Tiger so much, and viceversa. Do you agree? Now that I think
>>>>of it, Thorsten likes both, CST and Tiger, so I may be wrong.
>>>
>>>I like the games. it is not important HOW a program gets a beautiful
>>>game, it is important THAT it plays beautiful chess games.
>>>i am not interested in games that are dump, produced by dump programs.
>>>by boring games between junior-fritz or nimzo-fritz or whatever.
>>>i am interested in planful games . hiarcs and mchess and ctiger and rebel
>>>and virtual and cstal and and and produce those interesting games.
>>>this is what i like.
>>>i do not understand why your tiger plays cats and mice and not active.
>>>strange.
>>
>>I have maybe an explanation.
>>
>>Enrique has played most of the games by giving a slower computer to Tiger. While
>>I would never have dared to do this myself, the experiment was worth it as Tiger
>>managed to save the day.
>>
>>It's a phenomenon I have witnessed myself several times. When Tiger was a weak
>>program (2 years ago), I tried to play Tiger against Genius, and Tiger against
>>Rebel, giving twice the time to Tiger (Tiger had 10mn for the game, the opponent
>>was given 5 minutes).
>>
>>Suddenly, I would have said that it was not Tiger playing anymore. The opponents
>>looked really ridiculous. They played mostly defensive games and most of the
>>time blundered a piece or two before being mated without mercy.
>>
>>The playing style of both opponents were completely different. I would say that
>>the strength of the opponent has a big influence on the playing style of my
>>program. It is probably true for any other program too, but I prefer to be
>>careful and speak for Tiger only.
>>
>>So Enrique has given an inferior computer to Tiger, and I'm not surprised at all
>>that he finds Tiger playing passive.
>>
>>Instead of playing Tiger against another program, play Tiger against a human
>>player. You'll see that the sytle is completely different. Very active and
>>agressive.
>>
>>The same happens when you play Tiger against Rebel. The games are *incredible*.
>>Until you reach the last move, it is impossible to say which program is going to
>>win. I recommend the experiment to all the interested testers.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>
>As I always have to test like this as I never had two comps of equal speed I
>know a few about this .
>
>It happens with nearly every prog ; there was a real cool post by Chris
>Whittington explaining what happens ( with a ferret example ) and several other
>programmers agreed on it ( for sure I remember Bruce Moreland did ) .
Yes, it's a amazing phenomenon. If you are not aware of this you can be easily
mislead about a program's ability and style.
Christophe
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.