Zappa Mexico

[Graham Banks]

Instead of whining like a bunch of kids, why don't you just thanks Anthony for the free update??

I'm very grateful for the free update.

[David Dahlem]

Hi George

I don't think anything needs to be clarified, my post was clear, and Stefan was clear when he said the decision was made by Anthony. (Toto is no longer in Kansas either).

Regards
Dave


You already had the fame with your chess program and your logos- how many guys can do both. Short list. Now fortune ($$$$) is headed your way. Hell, i wanna be like you. I knew i should have stayed in Kansas


Remember your friends regards,

You wanna be like me? You wanna pay my taxes? LOL!!

[geots]

A new version of Zappa Mexico is now available

www.shredderchess.com

What is the version number of this update? I see nothing on www.shredderchess.com or in the download about a version number. The only info i could find is this ...

1) there is a new "contempt" parameter [- values = higher contempt]
2) Zappa plays a bit faster when it is low on time
3) three small bugs in the evaluation fixed
4) Mexico actually used about 10% less time than Zanzibar, and I reverted to the original value
5) "Auto" Thread parameter detects CPUs
6) Options to make Zappa print less information; print pv tips and Hide Fail Highs.
7) A few eval fixes based on my experience in Mexico. Nothing too dramatic.

Should this version be called Zappa Mexico, Zappa Mexico2, or ???.

Regards
Dave

I suggest calling it Zappa Mexico.1, just like the Chess Tiger 2007 update was called Chess Tiger 2007.1 - but it would be better if the author did the naming.

I tend to agree, Gabor. But the problem for me is i know how to change the name of a winboard converted to uci before i load it, in the wb2uci engine file. But i dont know how to change the name of a straight uci engine before i load it in chessbase- only after i have loaded it. In the uci file it creates. But i cant do that because i cant load it first , since the names are the same. Are you going to tell me to then change the name of the original one first, since it is already loaded. But we cant do that because we would have to change all the pgns and listings we already have for it. Ok. Have i confused you enough? Bet you didnt know i was this incompetent. But Graham can vouch for that. He has to put up with me every day. Bottom Line- I dont know what to do. Which is not too unusual.

George, the version gotta be slightly stronger so I would even call it Zappa Mexico +. Something to differentiate the two versions for testing groups is a good idea. You can just rename the exe George.

No, Tony- we arent in Kansas anymore. That doesnt work in chessbase.

Tin Man regards,

[Erik Roggenburg]

Yes, I was shocked when I loaded the engine in Fritz 10, and noticed that the name was the same and that the original engine was no longer there.

I ended up naming the engine in Fritz 10 "Zappa Mexico 071112," for the date in which the download was announced.

[geots]

Yes, I was shocked when I loaded the engine in Fritz 10, and noticed that the name was the same and that the original engine was no longer there.

I ended up naming the engine in Fritz 10 "Zappa Mexico 071112," for the date in which the download was announced.

Very creative. I like that name

Regards,

[Henrik Dinesen]

George,

It's really just a slight bug-fix as far I know...

But, if you "insist" on renaming, use an hex-editor - ensures a complete renaming in GUI's...
For sure, I'm not the one doing it... Realy don't think it's needed

Best,

[geots]

George,

It's really just a slight bug-fix as far I know...

But, if you "insist" on renaming, use an hex-editor - ensures a complete renaming in GUI's...
For sure, I'm not the one doing it... Realy don't think it's needed

Best,

Thanks, Henrik. But CCRL is sort of keen on testing both versions to be sure. I did solve the problem by changing the names in the 1kb uci file created when you load the engine in chessbase. We are naming the original Zappa Mexico 32-bit and the update we are naming it Zappa Mexico II 32-bit. At least that will keep us from having to add 32 bit at the end of all the pgns from now on. But yes, i agree with you. I would be shocked if there was a strength increase. We certainly wont see anything like we did with Zanzibar. (Graham and i are naming the 32 bit versions the above- im not sure of everyone. But it doesnt matter what its called- it auto ends up in the right place as long as the tester makes the distinction between the 2. And of course there are 64 bits. It never ends)



The Best to You,