Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 05:53:09 12/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 1999 at 22:26:39, Christophe Theron wrote: >On December 26, 1999 at 18:18:44, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >> >>When Sargon V for PC appeared, it was too late to become a darling. A first >>version for Mac had been a complete failure and in the meantime the mess was >>fixed and the PC version was in the shells, programs like Mchess, Rex and Zarkov >> were those whom asked and received the attention. As I.M. Larry Kaufman said in >>his review - Computer Chess Reports 1991-1992, Vol 2, N°3- “Sargon might have >>been worth recommending if it had come out three years ago...” , although at >>the same time he recognized that in his test with his problem set Sargon, >>running in a 486-33, got 2326 USCF. >>All this maybe seems old history, a chapter for nostalgics, but you well can get >>a surprise if you put Sargon V to run in a decent current Pentium computer. >>Suddenly you realize how good the last programs by Kathe and Dan Spracklen were >>and how far from obsolescence the best of beginnings of 90’s programs in >>general were and are if run with modern stuff. And then you have a material >>demonstration of how much the progress has been based in better equipment and >>not so much in software after all. Not that progress was not made in source >>codes, not that new techniques did not appear, but -and this is a very great >>BUT- sometimes is truly difficult to see the difference between a good current >>commercial program and Sargon. If you still have it, test it and see how he >>handles the endings. Etc. Maybe one of the many pals here that likes to pit >>programs each against other could pit this aparent piece of museum agains, say, >>Rebel or Genius. >> >>Fernando > > >Fernando, you should try Sargon more seriously. It sounds like you only play >yourself against these programs, so you get a very vague idea of how good they >are relatively to each other. > >Sargon loses badly to all the good commercial programs. The faster the computer, >the worse Sargon does. > >This being said, the Spracklens were amongst the heroes of my youth, they have >done an incredibly good job at that time. > > > Christophe Hi: You are right and you are wrong; right that I only play personally against programs; wrong in saying or implying than that is not serious enough. Of course I know sargon have no chances againts top programs, but what I say is that if YOU play a game against it, differences tend to blurr. In other words, to be defeated by a 2500 or to be defeated by a 2350 is not a very different experience after all. In the area of human Vs comps, what I want to say that good stuff like sargon running in fast computers are still very competitive If -another IF- you are not a master, but at most an expert. Remember that an expert is just around 2100 at most and sargon probably is 2350 in pentium, so.... Waiting for Tiger Fernando
This page took 0.01 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.