Author: Chessfun
Date: 02:04:36 05/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2001 at 22:51:19, Jason Williamson wrote: >On May 19, 2001 at 22:48:02, Eric Tom wrote: > >>On May 19, 2001 at 22:24:21, John Dahlem wrote: >> >>>On May 19, 2001 at 21:51:18, stuart taylor wrote: >>> >>>>On May 19, 2001 at 21:28:25, Eric Tom wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 19, 2001 at 19:06:11, stuart taylor wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 19, 2001 at 15:34:15, william penn wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>i suspect that cm6555 would still score among the top three, even against the >>>>>>>best and newest programs. Cm8000 is a rip-off since there is a noticable >>>>>>>decrease in strength from the previous more strong version 6000 >>>>>> >>>>>>On what do you base that? >>>>>>And is it stronger than 6000 or 7000? >>>>>> >>>>>>And if it is a rip off, can there be any compensation, or money-back? >>>>>> >>>>>>S.Taylor >>>>> >>>>>Compensation? Maybe the recent amazing personalities, such as CMUtzinger and >>>>>CMFun can compensate, I don't know. I've recently fell in love with >>>>>CM8_Bendorz. >>>>> >>>>>Regards, >>>>>Eric >>>> >>>>A clear weakening of playing strength makes it questionable as an "upgrade" in >>>>my opinion. >>>>All other extras and improvements should NEVER be at the expense of playing >>>>strength, Unless specifically made clear. If it's simply not improved, that's >>>>also not so good, but if it is EVEN WEAKER, then patches must patch up atleast >>>>that! >>>>I don't know if any other program was that much weaker than TWO upgrades >>>>earlier! >>>>S.Taylor >>> >>> >>>It's a _different_ engine, I don't know if they ever claimed it was stronger, >>>and if they didn't, there is no reason to even _think_ of compensation. If they >>>did, I personally still wouldn't feel cheated as long as the thing isn't some >>>random mover or something like that (they added features, that is enough to call >>>it a new version). Also, I haven't seen any cm6000-cm8000 matches published, >>>and until someone does, I suggest everyone stop assuming 8000 is weaker than >>>6000 anyway. >>> >>> >>>John >> >>Well, on the box, it said that it has revamped the engine to make it play on >>grandmaster level...Anyway, I personally think that CM8000 is stronger than >>6000. To me, it's the opening book's fault. Maybe the book just fits CM6000's >>style and not CM8000. Just my two cents. Where are my two cents anyway? Do >>you have them?! >> >>Regards, >>Eric > > >Ahh a sensible statement at last. Yes the opening book is the single biggest >weakness that CM8000 has. I expect to see it lose more then one game from the >opening this weekend. :) > >JW Personally I think book learning is higher on my list. If you let it run on autoplay enough you'll see it repeat loss after loss with naturally identical moves. But of course the opening book itself is much weaker than most other top programs. Also tablebases would be a nice addition to CM9000. Sarah.
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.