Author: Arturo Ochoa
Date: 07:26:15 02/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2005 at 02:14:15, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 18, 2005 at 01:49:53, David Mitchell wrote: > >>On February 17, 2005 at 14:03:30, Tord Romstad wrote: >> >>>A couple of days ago, a well-known programmer and regular >>>poster here on the CCC claimed that a good opening book >>>was worth at least 700 Elo points. I thought this number >>>looked completely outrageous, and decided to do a simple >>>experiment. >>> >>>I am the author of a basic and minimalistic UCI chess engine >>>called Glaurung. Source code and executables for Mac OS X, >>>Linux and Windows can be found at the following URL: >>> >>>http://www.math.uio.no/~romstad/glaurung/glaurung.html >>> >>>Recently, I have played some test matches with Glaurung >>>against the strongest engine I have on my compter: Hiarcs >>>9.6. Not surprisingly, all such matches end in crushing >>>victories for Hiarcs. The last match I played ended >>>75-25 in Hiarcs' favor. >> >>Your test is so flawed in design, with almost no control factors in place, that >>your conclusions are irrelevant, imo. >> >>Glaurung may lose 3:1 to Hiarcs for a huge number of reasons, or a mixture of >>several. It may lose with it's book, for quite different reasons than it loses >>when playing without it's book, to Hiarcs. > > >It seems that you did not read Tord's post and surprisingly you are not the only >one who did not read it. > >Glaurung was a constant opponent that always used book. > >The test was to test the value of hiarcs book and not the value of Glaurung's >book. > >Ignore Glaurung that is not an important engine. > >The experiment results are simple >Hiarcs with book beat opponent A 75:25 >Hiarcs without book beat opponent A 72:28 > >You can say that one opponent may be misleading and you need many opponents to >test the value of Hiarcs's book but it is clear that the value of Hiarcs book is >not close to 700 elo. > >The value of book may be bigger in tournaments but I think that most people >consider tournaments as not more important than other games so they do not do >special preperation for tournament(of course I never make it lose on purpose but >the games in CCT are not more important than other games as long as movei is an >extremely weak engine that is probably even weaker than glaurung because it is >near the level of gothmog and gothmog is weaker than glaurung based on Tord). > To be or not to be: that is the question you must answer...... >The only reason that I played in tournament likw WCCC or CCT is simply because >people asked me to play there. Of course.... WCCC would have never been celebrated if Uri Blass had not participated. Come on, Uri. The Earth is here.... > >I am not playing to win(at least not in the near future) > Again the question: If you are not playing to win, why do you spend time participating in Tournaments? This is really funny: To participate in a Tournament and planning to be the last place of it. :))))) >I already said that I do not think that movei is important when I considered to >cancel my participation when one of the reason is that I did not make a >significant improvement in movei and I did not consider the participation of it >as important but people asked me to play inspite of it. > >Uri Normal people think it is a good experience to participate in such live Tournaments. It is nice to win. However, giving excuses after you lose several games such as "I dont plan to win" is very silly.
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.