Author: blass uri
Date: 11:47:31 06/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 01, 2000 at 14:33:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 01, 2000 at 14:13:10, Joshua Lee wrote: > >>Here's a game where today's programs would've smacked up one of the best of >>15years ago.... >> >>1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 >>5. 0-0 b5 6. Bb3 Bb7 7.Re1 Bc5 8. c3 d6 >>9. d4 Bb6 10.a4 h5 11. axb5 axb5 >>12. Rxa8 Qxa8 13. Na3 exd4 >>14. cxd4 Ba6 15. e5 dxe5 16. dxe5 Ng4 >>17. Bxf7+ Ke7 18. Kf1 b4+ 19. Nc4 Rd8 >>20. Qc2 Kxf7 21. Qf5+ Nf6 22.Qc2 b3 >>23. Qe2 Nd4 24. Nxd4 Rxd4 25. Kg1 Bxc4 >>26. Qf3 Qxf3 27. gxf3 0-1 >> >>22. exf6 hello isn't this the obvious move? yes as i see no way to lose after >>this .... 22...Bxc4+ 23. Kg1 >> >>Can i make the conclusion that atleast for this game programs of today are >>better than Hitech and Bebe of 1985? > > >Of course not. Did you see the game where Fritz got slapped silly in the Dutch >tournament? Does that mean it can't keep up with anybody today? No, it just >meant it got into one bad game. Hitech can play with most any program of today. >It would probably lose more than it would win since it has been passed by in >terms of speed. But it would not be a pushover by _any_ stretch of the >imagination, and would prove to be very dangerous. > >BeBe searched about 40K moves per second, and would be overwhelmed by most >any program of today. But HiTech could hit over 160K nodes per sec, with a >very good evaluation that didn't slow down as they added terms due to the >hardware design they used. Hitech would be a very bad program to underestimate. I am not impressed by the nps because I believe that the search rules and evaluation of today's program is better than hitech. If my memory is right Ernst Heinz claimed here that hitech was not better than Fritz3(p90) Uri
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.