Author: Charles Unruh
Date: 17:56:38 02/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2000 at 20:42:26, John Warfield wrote: > > > Unless someone can produce some evidence to the contrary, I still believe >rebel is clearly better against humans than the other programs. I think the >combined aegon results as well as the GM Challenge prove this. Computer Vs >Computer chess proves very little, Evidence is that Annand was able to crush >fritz but could do very little against Rebel, Yet Fritz consistently defeats >Rebel, what does all this tell you? Well firstly i haven't seen Anand play Fritz in a 40/2. Further i seriously doubt(no offense intended) that you can get 5 people around here that will support the idea that Rebel is stronger than Fritz period in 5 minute games. Also from looking at actual games, Rebel falls not even for fantastically brilliant combos but really quite simple ones that are well in the capability of GM's. To me if you play good chess you wont get absolutely blown out as Rebel has in the cadaques tournament. I think Rebel is a good solid program, and definitely above 2500 on fast hardware (P500s and above). Recently Enrique said that J6 was the only program not to fall into line with his test suite, and this was because it's the only progam who's positional strength surpassed its tactical strength. I then told Enrique that "if Rebels positional strength didn't surpass its tactical strength then rebel was in trouble". Enrique replied that rebel was indeed in trouble :)(Though he made mention of Ed's patch). As an analysis engine of my games i think Fritz has the clearest vision.
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.