lkaufman wrote: Are you saying that your results were about the same at 10" and at 120"? That would be surprising. If you don't mind, can you tell us your result specifically at 120" + 1.2", including the number of games played and the elo range of the opposition? I'm curious because so far the LS list reports +27 elo which probably differs from your +45 by more than the combined error, unless your 120" sample was rather small.
My own results for h4 against h3 are very good, but as we know these gains often shrink when testing against foreign opposition.
Anyway, you have clearly made a solid improvement over h3, and Houdini 4 is again going to be topping the rapid rating lists for now.
At 10"+0.1" I play 27,000 or 30,000 games (9 or 10 opponents x 3000).
At 120"+1.2" I play 3,600 or 4,000 games (9 or 10 opponents x 400).
The opponents for Houdini 4 range from Naum 4 (the weakest) to Houdini 3 (the strongest).
The gauntlets are run for every dev version of the engine, and the end the evolution (hopefully progress) is documented.
I've been using this system since Houdini 1.5; in my current lists I have the following relative ratings, settings Houdini 1.03 at a conventional 3000 points:
> 10"+0.1":
Houdini 1.03a: 3000
Houdini 1.5: 3045
Houdini 2.0: 3070
Houdini 3: 3120
Houdini 4: 3165
> 120"+1.2"
Houdini 1.03a: 3000
Houdini 1.5: 3050
Houdini 2.0: 3080
Houdini 3: 3140
Houdini 4: 3185
As you can see the results are very similar at 10" and 120".
It also shows the progress in 3.5 years
.
Cheers,
Robert