It really sickens me when users of programs, who probably haven't programmed a chess game themselves, criticise the efforts of others.
This is the kind of stuff that some programmers dish out when they don't have anything else to say,I've seen some of the programmers state that to different people a lot of time,especially when someone enquire about the engine's progress with comments exactly like how the original poster does.
It should not be taken seriously and I'd suggest that you go to amazon site for book reviews and take Da vinci code for example and read only the reviews of critics,There are critcs,there are always critics and critics are needed to judge the quality of the book and even someone who voted 4 out of 5 adds some critical points,and asking the critic if he has written a book is silly ,the same principle applies here.Asking a mechanical engineer if he has written a chess program looks silly and quite irritating to me
Crafty is a great program
I agree with you,it's great because it's strong open source program,after Fruit and Toga,Glaurung and few others.
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
Why is it that you always start threads without providing any kind of proof John? True that Crafty lagged behind for a while, but it seem to have caught up with a lot of engines. If you want to get the true strength of crafty use a 64bit version with ponder on. Here is the data from the web's premier tournament aka WBEC. If you look at the history, you can see that previous public version 19.20 was demoted to first division and that the newer version was able to make it back to the premier and it is not facing any kind of relegation. My testing also shows that crafty has improved about 50 points from the 19.20 series, if you want me to post the data, I will post that as well. Below listed are the 24 of the strongest chess engines available(some only for a select few) counting out Fritz and Junior.
Tony Thomas wrote:My testing also shows that crafty has improved about 50 points from the 19.20 series,
All the latest Crafty versions have shown progressive gains in strength in CCRL 40/40 testing.
Still early in my testing, but I'm particularly impressed with the latest version so far - Crafty 21.5.
Keep up the good work Bob and team.
Tony Thomas wrote:My testing also shows that crafty has improved about 50 points from the 19.20 series,
All the latest Crafty versions have shown progressive gains in strength in CCRL 40/40 testing.
Still early in my testing, but I'm particularly impressed with the latest version so far - Crafty 21.5.
Keep up the good work Bob and team.
He does not criticize the program, neither his author. He just observe that, perhaps, there is not progress in it.
To realize that it is not necessary to be programmer; it is enough to be user.
fern wrote:He does not criticize the program, neither his author. He just observe that, perhaps, there is not progress in it.
To realize that it is not necessary to be programmer; it is enough to be user.
nuff wrote:The likes of Fritz, Rybka etc can claim improvement in strength as the later versions are released. How come crafty does not enjoy the same improvement in strength as the commercial versions? Even something like the free spike has seen a dramatic improvement in strength from 0.9 to 1.2.
My $.02 - Crafty is getting better - I do think some of the commercial engines are getting better faster. Latest test version of Crafty is clearly stronger (imo) than any previous version. Crafty is non commercial , being worked by voluteers, when they have the time, while holding down their day jobs. Commercial engines are being by people who are depending, or perhaps trying to depend on their success and earning financial rewards - perhaps enough to live on. Big difference. If interesed, I can you send a version that i better than any previous version of crafty and you can run your own tests. Email me mfbyrne_pa@msn.com
,the same principle applies here.Asking a mechanical engineer if he has written a chess program looks silly and quite irritating to me
