Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:25:34 10/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 1999 at 15:28:59, odell hall wrote: >On October 15, 1999 at 15:19:43, Paul Massie wrote: > >>It's worth keeping in mind that the Rebel hardware for three of those games was >>relatively old and slow. Only the top game was played on a fast PC. That makes >>Rebel's result look somewhat better. >> >>Paul >> > > Yeah but the problem is I thought I heard larry kaufman saying that computers >are grandmasters on Pent 200, and the ssdf list suggest the same, But after >watching these Strong IM's I do not think I could believe this. Probally need a >Amd 400 or better to get GM results. This leads me to another question. On what >hardware are we measuring whatever Rebel is GM? If it played on a 486 would we >factor in these results also? I am a little confused here? The hardware is a good question. However, one game was played on the k6 600 machine that was flakey before. It seemed to be fine this time around. The others weren't on exactly 'cheesy' hardware, so I don't think the hardware issue is a big one, since there aren't many of these 4 at a time matches in planning. I think Larry has always been _very_ liberal in labeling computers as GM. As has Monty Newborn (check out the last 10 years of ACM tournaments, and every year it mentions GM strength). I didn't notice all of the hardware, but it is probably listed on Ed's web site... but there were at least PII/400's in the group with the K6 600. > > > >>On October 15, 1999 at 15:00:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On October 15, 1999 at 13:25:17, Howard Exner wrote: >>> >>>>Anyone have the scoop on this re-match? Watching the one game on the rebel page >>>>but how are the other three games unfolding? >>> >>> >>>Rebel won 1 game, lost 2, and drew 1.
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.