Author: Mark Young
Date: 19:53:54 08/19/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 19, 1998 at 16:17:39, Mark Loftus wrote: >On August 19, 1998 at 08:00:12, Moritz Berger wrote: > >>On August 19, 1998 at 07:25:52, Mark Loftus wrote: >> >>>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 >> >>I am sceptical of Silman's assessment of programs because he wrote about some >>programs as if he knew them only from hearsay. Also, he mentioned Shredder 2 >>among the strongest programs without any further comments but completely forgot >>about Hiarcs 6, Junior and the many human tournaments (also at 40/120 tc) where >>e.g. M-Chess, Fritz and Hiarcs participated. He didn't mention AEGON nor did he >>talk much about strength at different time controls. >> >>Moritz > >I'll grant you that Silman is not an expert on computer programs and his >assesment was not a complete analysis of all the top programs, but I think it is >valuable to hear his views and I think he has a good idea of the strength of the >programs available to him. How he does at 40/2 would also be interesting. > >Mark This is another problem I had with his reviews. I don’t think he could win against any of the programs that he mentioned. I have played many programs against him a few years ago like the chessmachine, Chess genius 2, M-chess 3.xx or 4.xx. And he lost about 70% of the time from just the above programs running on a 486 at 66 MHz computer. He was one of the worst strong players I have seen against chess programs. Maybe he has gotten better over time playing chess programs. But from the tone of his reviews and lack of any data and vague and somewhat contradictory statements make me very skeptical of his reviewing style. I also would have like to see what he thought of the programs at 40/2. With maybe some position examples from his games against each of the programs that show the strength and weaknesses of each program. That would be very interesting.
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.