Hi all, Gian-Carlo Pascutto: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Russell Wallace wrote: >>> I haven't seen Leela before, but the claim of high dan-level >>> performance on 9x9 is certainly interesting. >> >> I don't think 2200 ELO on the 9x9 CGOS is equivalent to 'high dan-level' >> play. > >I was under the impression that MoGo (approx 2350 CGOS) was >starting to cause trouble for pro players on 9 x 9. The released >Leela version is a bit stronger than the last on CGOS and uses >all CPUs, so "high dan level" was supposed to be a reasonable estimate.
MoGo's highest rating on cgos 9x9 was 2556. http://cgos.boardspace.net/9x9/cross/MoGo_G3.4.html -Hideki >If someone has factual data[*] about 9 x 9 performance of >current bots I'll gladly revise the estimate on the webpage >on my own. > >[*] factual data is not: "I feel it's about 1kyu". Or "I played >a few games and it sucks in life & death. I had to take back a move >because I wasn't really concentrated but I beat it easily. Must be >less than 2 dan strength". > >One of the best things I found was a report from a 6 dan that >he won a match 5-2 against an older version of MoGo. That puts >MoGo at about 4 to 5 dan. I don't think what I said is >unreasonable, unless a 5 dan is not considered "high dan level". > >Arguing about this feels like a waste of time anyway. At the last >KGS tournament people were arguing that Crazy Stone is overrated >because "it can't be 1k". > >The last time I saw this was when "dan" was called "grandmaster". -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
