Not logged inCSS-Forum
Forum CSS-Online Help Search Login
CSS-Shop Impressum Datenschutz
Up Topic Hauptforen / CSS-Forum / Thinker 5.3B against Naum 3.1
- - By Orlando de la Vega Date 2008-11-26 12:54
Thinker 5.3B against Naum 3.1

PlaceEngineAuthorCountryPointsSingle results
1Thinker 5.3BLance Perkins26.0/50½101½½0101-½½½1½1½½0½-1½½1½1½½½0-½0011½0½10-0101½00110
2Naum 3.1Aleksandar Naumov24.0/50½010½½1010-½½½0½0½½1½-0½½0½0½½½1-½1100½1½01-1010½11001



50 of 50 matches played.
Thinker 5.3B v/s Naum 3.1 (50: + 16,= 20,- 14)

Start of tournament: ......... 2008.11.25, 19:31:31
Town/ Country: .............. Dax, France
Level: ............................ Blitz 40/5' repeated
Hardware: ...................... Intel® Pentium® Dual CPU T2370
Engines: ......................... Thinker 5.3B / Naum 3.1
Hash: ............................. 128 MB / 128 MB
GUI: ............................... Shredder Classic 3
OS: ................................ Windows Vista
Ponder OFF
Nalimov TB ..................... 3+4+5
Book: ............................. Shredder book, stopped using after 5 moves.
Openings: ....................... 25 different openings randomly chosen by GUI, large mode.

Very great performance for the last Thinker 5.3B, congrats for good job to Lance Perkins.
We all hope that the next step of his work will be to show the PVs


Best regards,
Orlando
Parent - - By Gerhard Sonnabend Date 2008-11-26 15:25
I don't think so !

http://www.open-aurec.com/wbforum/viewtopic.php?t=49609

[...snip...]
Of the commonly requested features, this is what they look like:
1. running PV - distant future
2. EGTB/EGBB - very distant future
3. UCI - never
[...snip...]

ThatsIt.
Parent - By Orlando de la Vega Date 2008-11-26 16:19
Thanks Gerhard for this information !

For my tests, I forgot to write that I used the version Inert Thinker 5.3B

Best,
Orlando
Parent - By Michael Scheidl Date 2008-11-26 19:50
Gegen Rybka 2.3.2a hat Thinker 5.3B 15,0/50 erzielt (3m+3s):

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?topic_view=threads&t=24845
Parent - - By Jens Heerklotz Date 2008-11-27 12:55
Orlando, maybe someone told you before, maybe noone told you but i really do think
you should change the testing scheme if you ever want to go somewhere with it....

-Number of games much too low, you could role dice instead.

-On top of that "25 randomly chosen Openings" thus there is absolutely NO compatibility/ comparability
to the other engine matches. If you would at least always play the "same" openings in every match...

Therefore the result is as important as a flee in the countryside of oklahoma.

Cheers
Parent - By Orlando de la Vega Date 2008-11-27 15:40

Hi Jens !

Thank you for your comments.
For sure you're right!
But you know I have so little time, that's why I run too much games. Nevertheless I do the possible to run a minimum of games to finally have an opinion about an engine. Do you see ? 

Now if I let the GUI organize "25 randomly chosen Openings", it is because I want to avoid an engine being favored by some openings.
In fact, an opening is used two times: the first engine plays with whites in the first game, then it plays with blacks in the second one. That's all !

Best regards,
Orlando
Up Topic Hauptforen / CSS-Forum / Thinker 5.3B against Naum 3.1

Powered by mwForum 2.29.3 © 1999-2014 Markus Wichitill