Author: Paulo Soares
Date: 21:02:52 08/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 26, 2000 at 16:20:13, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 26, 2000 at 15:28:59, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>On August 26, 2000 at 14:52:22, Sandro Necchi wrote: >> >>>On August 26, 2000 at 08:53:45, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>> >>>>Shredder won the WMCCC, and even if there is an important luck factor in any 9 >>>>rounds event, the fact that it won for the second consecutive time, together >>>>with the quality of its games, makes quite clear that sheer luck was not the >>>>reason for Shredder's success. In my opinion, Shredder is the strongest in the >>>>endgame and, together with Junior, has probably the best evaluation functions of >>>>all programs. On the other hand, it lacks the search speed of Fritz, Tiger, >>>>Nimzo and The King. Overall, I think that Shredder is clearly one of the very >>>>best chess engines. >>> >>>Yes, you are correct. >>>> >>>>In London, Fritz and Shredder have been the only undefeated programs, and the >>>>only ones, together with Nimzo, that played the strongest possible opponents. >>>>Shredder and Fritz have also been the only programs that from the first until >>>>the last day of the tournament were on top. Claiming any sort of superiority of >>>>one over the other based on half a point difference is, in my opinion, unfair to >>>>Fritz and the greatest nonsense I read here in CCC. >>>> >>>>My guess about the final outcome was Fritz, Junior and Shredder, although I >>>>wasn't sure at all about the order. >>>> >>>>Shortly before London, I played these games with Shredder 4.22 on 2 P600E >>>>machines with 256MB RAM and the same WMCCC time controls. S4.22 beat neatly the >>>>other 2 betas I made it play against, by 6-0 in one of the matches. The overall >>>>results were great, and the final Shredder 5 will be even better, I'm sure of >>>>it. Enjoy. >>> >>>Yes, but you did not have our new opening book which we use at the tournament. >>>Unfortunately 9 games are not enough to show all the potential, but the new >>>commercial version will. >>>I am the opening book maker. I know you know me. >> >>Hi Sandro, >> >>Of course I know you! I didn't know you had anything to do with Shredder. This >>is a guarantee that Shredder will have a great opening book, and certainly >>better than the one I used. > > >I was not impressed by shredder's opening book in WMCCC. > >Shredder falled in a trap against Nimzo and it seemed that it did not get a good >position out of book against Rebel but I do not know in the case of the game >against Rebel when the sides left book so it is possible that the mistake of >shredder was in the middle game. > >My impression based on WMCCC was that the strong parts of shredder were the >endgame and tactics when it knew to avoid Qxb4 in the following position: > >r3rb1k/6p1/p2p3p/1ppb4/PB6/5NRP/1q3PP1/1B1QR1K1 b - - 0 1 > >Shredder knew to avoid Qcb4 and played Bc4 when other programs like >chessmaster6000 or hiarcs7.32 and also Fritz6 (based on James walker's post) >fall in the trap Qxb4. > >The only program that I found that can avoid Qxb4 is Junior5.9 so I guess that >Junior6a can also avoid the trap. > >I do not have tiger or Nimzo or Rebel century2 and I did not check >RebelCentury1.2 > >Uri This is a very interesting position. In my PIII-450, Rebel-Tiger(HT=64Mb), Rebel Century 1.2(HT=100Mb) and Junior6a(HT=100Mb) didn't avoid Qxb4 in less than 30 min. LG20002.8(HT=64Mb), in Winboard Interface, chooses Qb3 with 3min, but with 7min it returns to Qxb4, probably it would play Qb3 in tournament. Paulo Soares, from Brazil
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.