Author: Marc Bourzutschky
Date: 12:16:34 04/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
The Chessmaster format is indeed better, but no interface other than through Chessmaster is available. Besides, the Nalimov format has become a quasi industry standard. Since the contents of the two tablebases is the same, the main advantage of the Chessmaster is faster generation with less RAM, and somewhat smaller compressed file sizes. If there were a tool to translate Chessmaster format to Nalimov format we would already have all the 6-man tablebases by now. On April 01, 2004 at 14:18:16, Jason Kent wrote: >On April 01, 2004 at 14:07:22, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >>On April 01, 2004 at 13:56:25, Jason Kent wrote: >> >>>I just read this in the FEG.txt that i got off the chessmaster website. >>> >>>XVI. WHY THE FEG FORMAT? ================================================ >>> >>>Perhaps, after reading all of this, you are wondering why Chessmaster >>>9000 does not use either of the more commonly used EGDB formats, namely >>>those created by Eugene Nalimov or Ken Thompson (both of which bear the >>>names of their creators). There are many reasons for this: >>> >>>1. FEG data is about 20% smaller. Additionally, half-sets can be used if >>> hard drive space is an issue, making a "full useable" file set that is >>> almost 1/3 the size of the complete Nalimov file set. >>>2. FEG generation is much faster and doesn't need a huge amount of free >>> RAM to create a set of files. >>>3. FEG can do any 6-man files on a 32-bit platform. >>>4. The Thompson format is not a complete set (especially pawns on both >>> sides are lacking). >>>5. The Thompson format stores DTC (Distance to Conversion) values, >>> meaning that it stores the number of moves to either mate OR to a >>> capture/promotion, and will play whichever move has the smallest >>> winning value. This can result in silly moves (a capture that leads to >>> a mate in eight moves instead of a non-capture that leads to mate in >>> three moves). >>>6. Since Chessmaster 9000 is a mass market product, the majority of its >>> users are not aware of these other formats and how to get them. Also >>> for the ease of development it is easier not to be dependent on >>> technical support for data that was created using tools that were not >>> developed by Ubi Soft. >> >> Hi Jason >> Maybe you have asked the wrong question: "Why does Chessmaster 9000 >> not support the egtb format that all other engines do?". >> Kurt > >The reason I ask is because the egtb format sounds like its a little better. I >kinda wish cm9k used nalimov so it would be more compatible.
This page took 0.03 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.