Author: ujecrh
Date: 10:36:56 03/30/00
It is surprising to see that different people can get a really different feeling about a given program (no blame, it is probably very difficult to evaluate positional understanding of an engine). For instance, look at the two following summaries: ---------------- from WCCC pages: SOS Rudolf Huber SOS is a program which focuses on calculating speed rather than programmed chess knowledge. Since its author is not a chess player, the strength of the program has to come from its speed to calculate the variations. Up to now SOS has never won against a program which calculates faster, however there are not too many of them. Still, the author believes that the above mentioned apprach to computer chess delivers the best playing strength per programming effort ratio. ---------------- from Franks's chess pages: SOS plays a very positional and agressive chess game, which makes it an interesting new addition to the winboard engines. The comprehensive amount of chessknowledge is used efficiently. In games at tournament time control it can beat anyone. A new favourite of mine. ---------------- Maybe it was two slightly different versions but it is still surprising. I used to think that the main gap between commercial chess engines and amateur ones was the amount of chess knowledge put into it (with some exception among commercial engines that are known as really fast searchers). Is that still true or is there any amateur engine that contains heavy chess knowledge ? Ujecrh
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.