Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Engines for Correspondence vs Post-Mortem Analyses

Author: Bob Durrett

Date: 12:48:24 11/15/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 15, 2000 at 12:04:53, Martin Schubert wrote:

<snip>

>It depends what you're using a program for. The best program for analysing your
>(already played) games must not be the best program for correspondence games.
>
>Martin

Fritz has a feature, as almost everybody knows, which will analyze a single
position in great detail [if settings are right] overnight.  I have never used
that because I don't play correspondence chess, but perhaps many people do.

Fritz also allows you to use the computer overnight while you are away from the
computer to analyze a set of games.  Very useful as a starting point for
subsequent analyses [with or without the help of Fritz].  I use this a lot to
spot my errors, in games I failed to win, with the aim of "doing better next
time."

For each case, discussed separately, does anyone know whether or not use of
Fritz is not best?  Should some other software be chosen instead of Fritz?

What is the difference between the ways a computer would be programmed for each
case?  Is it likely that a program optimized for one of these two cases would be
sub-optimal for the other use?





This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.