Re: [gnugo-devel] Handtalk vs GnuGo: Game 1

[Gunnar Farneback]

Jessie wrote:
> Handtalk took white - and beat GnuGO by 16.5. SGF
> is attached. Handtalk plays FAST (<1min total for all
> moves vs 15 min total for GnuGO

Thanks, these games are valuable. Some observations:

1. GNU Go was definitely in the match. I don't think Handtalk can win
consistently against GNU Go 3.1.29.

2. Handtalk came out shorter in all close-combat fighting. Both the
upper right corner and the fight following the crosscut at G9 were
great successes for GNU Go.

3. Handtalk has a better sense of strong and weak groups. GNU Go lost
a lot when it first tenukied in the upper left corner to play O4, then
went back to the upper left while leaving O4 weak. Handtalk gained a
lot from chasing the O4 group into the centre. GNU Go, on the other
hand, never managed to make any white stones weak.

4. Handtalk was allowed to make side territory too easily, especially
swallowing R9 and linking underneath at O2.

5. Giving Handtalk a chance to live with ko by ignoring S14 was of
course bad, but white didn't take the opportunity to do anything.


Portela wrote:
> > OK - Installed GnuGO 3.1.29 - and loaded Handtalk
> > onto my laptop (which I forgot I had !)
> 
> Hmmm, It seems you ran them both on the same box. 

Not as I understood it, taking the context of a previous message into
account.

> Did you pay attention to the share of the CPU ? 
> Did the programs run with same proccess & threads priorities ?

I doubt that would have made any difference. Handtalk is known to be
fast, which current GNU Go versions are not.

> > Handtalk took white - and beat GnuGO by 16.5. SGF
> > is attached. Handtalk plays FAST (<1min total for all
> > moves vs 15 min total for GnuGO
> 
> Ah ? But your SGF record says that Handtalk took 17:49 and GnuGo 11:08 only
> ...
> 
> And btw, what happened with that variation ? an undo ?? How come ?

Looks like an operator's typo (clicko). The time spent by Handtalk
probably includes, and is dominated by, operator lag.

/Gunnar