Author: Harald Faber
Date: 07:23:41 02/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 09, 2000 at 10:04:43, Thorsten Czub wrote: >What i could try as a proof for or against the data is, >to try to replay the games on the same machines, but >manually without any autoplayer. Feel free, I won't spend my time with such events, my time is much more valuable. :-) >Since my k6-3 is as fast as haralds >k7, we would have the same hardware for cstal. > >concerning shredder, i don't have a 200 MMX anymore. >but i could use the k6-3 and let cstal 400 mhz play versus >shredder4 400 manually from the same games/openings 11-20 >harald played. and than we see if the result is that "strange" :-)) >or harald could do the same himself. but i guess he is not >motivated anymore :-) Exactly. :-) But I would like you to verify the short loss in round 12. Does Tal play the same moves in manual play? Set 3h/game and let the clock run for Shredder as long as you can see from the log/comments. >i do not believe that these results show real relations, >i guess ed is also suspicious that his rebel playing on auto232 >gets the strength HE believes it has. he says he has done >manually games and in his manually outplayed games rebel played >stronger. i do understand because i have the same effect with cstal. >It's no problem for me to play manually games. so i don't car much >about the autoplayer device. >but it would be a pity if these autoplayers generate data that >is not accurate and somehow "strange". What astonishes me is that Tal uses the Windows-auto232 while Ed only found problems with the DOS-auto232.
This page took 0.01 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.