Author: Harald Faber
Date: 05:22:45 02/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2000 at 14:25:23, James Robertson wrote: >On February 18, 2000 at 12:41:54, Harald Faber wrote: > >>On February 18, 2000 at 01:34:41, James Robertson wrote: >> >>>On February 18, 2000 at 01:03:50, Harald Faber wrote: >>> >>>>Game conditions: >>>>CSTal 2.03 with default style, Athlon 500, 64MB RAM >>>>Shredder 4 on AMD-K6-200, 24+8MB hash (64MB RAM) >>>> >>>>Game in 180min each side, so maximum is 6h per game. >>>> >>>>Result is >>>> >>>>Tal-Shredder 4-6 >>>>Shredder-Tal 7-3 >>>> >>>>Overall Shredder 4 won this match with a score of 13-7. >>>>Even on the slow machine Shredder seems to be VERY strong. >>>> >>> >>>In all games Shredder had the inferior hardware? >>> >>>James >> >>Correct! The Athlon on which Tal played is 2.3-2.6x faster than the K6-200 on >>which Shredder4 played. >> >>Amazing result, isn't it? > >I don't know. I have seen CSTal in three tournaments; in one it finished dead >last among comercial programs, in Thorsten's it is first, and in this match it >didn't do so well. :\ There are only few tourney where Tal does well, most of them are played by Thorsten. My results are and were always the same, no matter which desired style or hardware (recommended by Thorsten) I used, Thorsten was never satisfied and suggested changes again and again. When I played Tal2 it was wrong, Tal2.50 was wrong, Tal2.03 with style2.03 was wrong, always excuses. I wait for the excuse now when everything is right now, I used a fast machine for Tal, as fast as Thorsten's, used the "right" version, but still Tal lost against a much slower Shredder. And read yourself, now Thorsten again says this match means nothing, I should play Shredder on the same fast machine as Tal. Nonsense. As if Tal would play better against a faster (=stronger) Shredder... Judge yourself. >The first commercial program Insomniac ever beat was CStal 2.03 (on FICS; >Insomniac actual had weaker hardware). My overall opinion is that it can be >dangerous, but is quite a bit weaker than the top commercial programs. I don't see it a BIT weaker. Clearly weaker, approx. strength of the amateurs. >I am very curious to see more matches with CStal though. Thorsten's tournament >indicates that maybe it is a bit stronger than other evidence suggests? >James Again: I always had some disappointing games and results and except for Thorsten I have not seen many other people getting similar results to Thorsten's.
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.