Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Commercial program strength vs. amateur program strength

Author: Peter Berger

Date: 07:10:42 12/21/01

Go up one level in this thread


On December 20, 2001 at 21:21:41, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>
>>You _really_ narrow down the field for the commercials a lot here.
>>
>>You pick a professional : Chess Tiger.
>>
>>Lemme pick an amateur : Yace.
>>
>>OK - you win .
>>
>>How many commercial programs can be really sure to win this kind of "betting
>>battle" ?
>>
>>Regards,
>>pete
>
>
>
>That's not my point. We were talking about best commercial programs vs. best
>amateur programs.
>
>I agree that there are strong amateurs, but the interesting thing is the gap
>between the best professionals and the best amateurs.
>
>
>
>    Christophe

Oh , but I think we actually _were_ talking about the same thing here.

By your definition I think we only have four professional programs left:

Fritz, Junior, Shredder and Tiger.

When we are talking strongest availlable amateurs we are probably talking Yace
currently. The four above should have some chance to be 50-100 points ahead -
but I know of no other.

I think if you narrow the definition for the professionals even further as you
did in another post ( commercial success) we are left with three commercial
programs only.

pete



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.