Author: blass uri
Date: 05:04:25 07/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 04, 2000 at 06:56:07, Ralf Elvsén wrote: >On July 04, 2000 at 04:28:36, blass uri wrote: > >>On July 04, 2000 at 02:34:55, Steve wrote: >> >>>On July 03, 2000 at 18:49:14, Torstein Hall wrote: >>> >>>>I'm not so sure that Junior will give better analysis than Fritz 5. They are >>>>both fast searcher with about the same level of pos. knowledge. Anyway I feel >>>>that all the programs give most tactical variations anyway, even Hiarcs 7.32, >>>>considered among many as the most positional engine. >>> >>>I agree. Hiarcs 7.32 is great, but its strength (just like every other >>>engine's) is tactics. Its analysis of endgames is often horrendous. >>> >>>> >>>>I rather go for Crafty! Its free, has more chess knowledge than most of the >>>>programs and runs as a native chessbase engine! >>>> >>>>Torstein >>> >>>A number of people have made the same observation in this forum. But whenever I >>>play Hiarcs 7.32 against Crafty (running as ChessBase engine) -- generally at >>>either G/30 or G/60 -- Hiarcs wins easily. >> >>The only game that I played Hiarcs7.32 against Crafty17.11 at 3 hours/40 moves >>Crafty won and my observation was that hiarcs has a bug at time control that is >>longer than G/30 or G/60 and this is probably the main reason that it failed in >>the ssdf list. >> >>The bug is in playing and hiarcs could probably be a better program in >>tournament time control if it knew to clear its hash tables after every move >>because learning from previous search is bad if it is done in the wrong way. >> >>Uri > >I think you are too quick to draw conclusions. This "strange-moves-from- >Hiarcs-that-can't-be-reproduced-by-others-bug" is well known, but how >frequent is it? I have observed plenty of long time control games by >Hiarcs 7.32 and it is very seldom I suspect this to happen. But who knows? >I guess one would have to look carefully at every game afterwards. My >personal quess is that keeping the hash tables is better, but I have >no "proofs" . > >As to the strength of Hiarcs and Crafty, I have my own firm opinion >but it is "unscientific" and I'll keep it to myself :) > >Ralf The problem is mainly long time control problem. Hiarcs won Crafty17.11 3.5:.5 in my 40/40 games on one pentiumIII450 but this time control is faster than tournament time also because of the fact thatthe sides cannot ponder when 3 hours/40 moves on one computer is similiar to 2 hours/40 moves on 2 computers. There are cases when the problem does not lead to strange moves but lead to a longer "think" by hiarcs and it also can cause later mistakes on time trouble. In the case of the game that I played between hiarcs and crafty hiarcs did not blunder by Bxb6 but needed a long time to avoid it(at longer time control it even plays Bxb6). Another move(move 39) could not be reproduced manually without playing and hiarcs had some minutes for 2 moves so it has not time to find a better move I see at least 2 cases when hiarcs had problems in the game because of not clearing the hash tables so it seems not to be rare. I found this problem also in another position that I analyzed. 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.