Author: Mike S.
Date: 13:44:43 12/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 28, 1999 at 12:14:14, Christophe Theron wrote: >(...) given the months of hard work we spend on chess programming, I'm a little >bit sorry that you only test them by playing yourself a few games against them. > >This is simply not serious. >(...) if I had myself written a post like yours, explaining how good a >program is by just playing myself against it, I would have been lynched >immediately. Although most of us fans seem to be comparing engins, testing with positions or analyzing games, I think that "simply" playing against the computer is one main purpose of a chess program. So I do not wonder that somebody builds his opinion by that and judges by his impressions from that, and doesn't care much about that XYZ has beaten ABC 23-19 etc. I think, to really succeed on the market today, a program should have something beyond pure strenght. For example, Fritz' win of the Frankfurt Masters has much more importance to me than a SSDF ranking. Chessmaster has a lot of things built around the engine which is fun to use, like the detailed "personalities" and Josh Waitzkin's Corner. Of course, it depends if the aim is more the "mass" market, or the computer chess enthusiast. For the latter, Shredder i.e. may be attractive. Christophe, we hear good news of Tiger scoring excellent against other programs, but what else will it have in the retail version? Has it a special style, something that would be recogniseable as "tiger-like" when you see a game without knowing who played it? Regards, M.Scheidl
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.