Author: Mark Loftus
Date: 04:25:52 08/19/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 19, 1998 at 06:58:00, Mark Young wrote: >On August 19, 1998 at 05:07:31, odell hall wrote: > >> >>On August 18, 1998 at 22:40:38, blass uri wrote: >> >>> >>>On August 18, 1998 at 21:41:55, mike cooter wrote: >>> >>>>Here is the review I pulled from Inside Chess Online. Note the interesting >>>>comments he makes on each of the playing styles of each of the programs. >>>> >>>>Five Chess Engines. >>>>(A special review by Jeremy Silman) >>>>More and more players are buying chess computers, and more and more chess >>>>engines are available to the public. In the past, chess "boxes" like the >>>>Kasparov series, Boris Handroid, and endless others were all the rage. Today, >>>>with millions of families owning powerful PCs, a simple CD takes care of one’s >>>>chess "need" in a simple, inexpensive yet highly effective manner. >>>> >>>>What engines are best? This is the question I’ll be examining as I look at five >>>>of the most popular bits of software. Be warned! I am a computer idiot. Half the >> >> >> >>I think it's quite clear that silman knows absolutely nothing about computer >>chess , I doubt if he has even heard of The swedish rating list. But still i >>think it is interesting that he gives m-chess a 2500 rating!! isn't that a >>grandmaster? > >I don’t understand his reviews at all. It almost seems like he just took >generalities that he has heard other people say about the programs and just >wrote reviews based on that. His reviews seem very second hand to me. I can’t >believe anyone would print this. If this is the best that an IM player can do, I >will stick with the reviews from much weaker players, If they understand >computers and chess programs. > I have a lot of respect for Mr. Silman and his down to earth style. Also I think people should realize that the ssdf list is not the gospel, this is not a knock on their hard work - but when computer programs go up against masters, IMs and GMs, it is a whole new ballgame. The problem with the use of lists like the ssdf is that the programs will be tuned to beat the other programs and not get the improvement in strength you think you are getting. However, if IM's and GMs say the program is strong or GM, then I believe it. I think the better measure of a programs strength is against humans. Mark > >>>>in control, though I probably will be off-base there too! >>>> >>>>However, I do know what I enjoy, I know chess, and I know a good deal when I see >>>>one; so heed my advice or toss it in the dustbin. In either case, prepare >>>>yourself for ultimate annihilation by all of the engines about to be discussed! >>>> >>>>CHESSMASTER 5500: For only $35.00, this is a superb buy. This software offers >>>>you soothing music while you play, pictures of famous players and sets during >>>>setup (to get you in the mood), and a host of options involving strength, style, >>>>time settings, and the list goes on and on. >>>> >>>>For whatever reason, I did experience some bugs. I couldn’t make it give off a >>>>sound while moving, though I went into the appropriate box and clicked on all >>>>the proper bells and whistles. Because of this, it was in stealth mode, and I >>>>often sat there for several seconds before noticing that it actually did >>>>something! At one point things got even worse. I’d make a move that got out of >>>>book and the machine would just think and think, even though it was a >>>>five-minute game. I’d command it to move and it would ignore me. I tweaked all >>>>its other commands and they worked fine (so it wasn’t frozen). But the blasted >>>>thing just kept thinking. Finally, I gave up and ended its miserable existence. >>>> >>>>As I said earlier (given that the experienced bugs were peculiar to my system or >>>>were due to some form of stupidity on my part), Chessmaster 5500 is a giveaway >>>>for the price. It’s slick looking (though things are a bit cluttered and the >>>>board may give its owner a claustrophobic feel), strong (though not as strong as >>>>the other machines that I’ll be discussing!) and well designed. If you’re a >>>>Class A player or below, why get anything else? This program should offer you >>>>humiliating defeats for years and years to come. >>>> >>>>FRITZ 5: The makers of this software have declared that Fritz is stronger than >>>>most (or all?) of the other programs. Perhaps it does well when playing other >>>>machines, but it’s clear to me that, in human vs. machine games, Fritz is a bit >>>>weaker (and in some cases considerably weaker) than some of the other choices. >>>>Nevertheless, I would not want to be without my Fritz! >>>> >>>>Fritz 5 boasts the cleanest interface of any engine, and one of the nicest >>>>boards. Easy on the eye, all of its bells and whistles are simple to access. The >>>>feature I like the best is it’s analytic spread, which enables you to analyze a >>>>line and have it automatically placed on a spreadsheet. Chess symbols (equal, >>>>White is slight better, winning, unclear, stuff like that) can be added at the >>>>push of a button, and sidelines blend in seamlessly with the main features of >>>>your work to form an instant book of your ideas! >>>> >>>>Playing in a very tactical fashion, Fritz 5 tends to think it’s winning as soon >>>>as it gets a material edge; it has almost no feel for positional pawn or >>>>Exchange sacrifices. >>> >>>I found in the nunn match that Fritz5 sometimes understands that the side with >>>the material advantage is not better for positional reasons. >>> >>>I do not know why chessbase hides this fact and gives us a wrong impression that >>>fritz5 is only a tactical monster. >>> >>> >>>>Nevertheless, it plays blitz at a 2500 clip, and if you’re >>>>not paying attention (even if you are rated 2500) it can thrash you unmercifully >>>>game after game after game. >>>> >>>>At about $100.00, it’s considerably more expensive than Chessmaster 5500, but >>>>personally I have no interest in owning Chessmaster while Fritz has a permanent >>>>place in my software collection. >>>> >>>>CHESS GENIUS 5: This program is the other mainstay of my collection. It’s design >>>>is perfectly adequate (though not as nice as Fritz’s), but its main plus is its >>>>positional skills, which are far better than Fritz 5. In fact, after analyzing a >>>>complicated Exchange sacrifice for several days, I noticed that Fritz always >>>>thought the sac was unsound, while Genius saw and appreciated the positional >>>>ideas behind the sacrifice. >>> >>>I want to see examples >>> >>>Uri
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.