Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 07:11:27 08/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 27, 2000 at 17:58:14, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 27, 2000 at 17:25:55, Marcus Kaestner wrote: > >>>>Which program had the best opening book? Shredder 5.0 >> >>you must be kidding! >>shredder´s book was so very bad that shredder was named there "houdini-chess" >>because first he has had to untie himself. >> >>sorry, but it was one of the worst one´s. > >A good book is not a book that leads you to better positions but a book that >lead you to better result. > >I read that the 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 line shredder has more than 90% result and >if it is the case this line was a very good line. > >I read that the line against Sos was also good. > >I do not say that book of shredder was the best but I disagree that it was one >of the worst > > >>alex´book was BY FAR the best and there is NO doubt about that. >>having killer line´s but also with hardly a whole. >> >>>>Which program had the worst opening book? >> >>here you can say shredder. >> >>>>Which program had the best middlegame? Junior >> >>i prefer fritz >> >I was impressed by the way that Junior played the middle game against >Shredder,Rebel and tiger. I was not very impressed by Junior in the middlegame, it had everywhere a 0.00 score as if it's completely ignoring the world. It looks to me that juniors search is getting outdated, but that the bad way in which most programs attack and bad finishing dominated, like DIEP-JUNIOR could not get decided by DIEP in the middlegame. For sure Junior defended very well, but usual after doing some real stupid moves as it hardly got a worse middlegame position. For example the DIEP-Junior game, here DIEP predicted dxe5 instead of fxe5?, after fxe5 junior was in big trouble. Junior obviously didn't see this because it doesn't evaluate pins like DIEP does. >Fritz could get nothing in the middle game against Junior so I prefer >Junior(london) in the middle game. I thought fritz improved a lot, but it seems basically improved for blitz to me. It sure isn't a preprocessor anymore, but the knowledge inside its evaluation is stil limiting its great search. >>>>Which program had the worst middlegame? >>>>Which program was the best in the endgame? Shredder 5.0 >> >>yes, but even close rebel and tiger. > >>>>Which program was the worst in the endgame? >>>>Which program is best in closed positions? Rebel >> >>ok >> >>>>Which program is best in noticing attacks and attacking? Shredder 5.0 >> >>i would prefer junior. >> >>>>Which program is best in defense? Shredder 5.0 >> >>no doubt. >> >>>>Which program is best in playing human players? Shredder 5.0 >> >>no, no, no. much better is rebel. >> >>>>Finally, which program is best overall? Shedder 5.0 >> >>not so very clear. rebel has the best evaluation, tiger the best search and >>fritz the best combination of these two points. bt for me it is clear, that >>these four programs are dominating at the moment. > >It is not clear. >Junior was the most interesting program in the event. >I think that this program did the biggest change relative to previous versions. I don't know what Amir changed to junior, but it sure looked drastically to me. When talking about number of lines of source code changes, i'm sure that i changed more at DIEP as i changed really a lot in DIEP. This resulted however in bad performance, so probably no one cares (as people kick on results), but it's looking real good for DIEP's future. >Sometimes the change was good(see the games against Rebel and tiger) >Sometimes the change caused trouble when Junior played h5 against shredder or >let nimzo to win it by sacrificing the exchange. Nimzo is always overestimating passed pawns, so it was no big deal that nimzo found this sacrafice. In Nimzo-The King the same thing happened but with opposite results. In Nimzo-Shredder , there nimzo had a won position but couldn't profit for it as it feared the passed pawns too much. Against junior nimzo was just lucky in my eyes, even though i predicted during the game that nimzo would perhaps win it with an exchange sacrafice. I just said this because i find juniors search for the future really outdated. pruning interesting moves with 3 plies or something similar is really not gonna improve it for the future. It will always miss logical human continuations in the future. It has a certain level and without changing its search its gonna get real hard. >I know that Rebel is a preprocessor so I doubt if it has the best evaluation. I agree here completely. Rebel sure isn't bad compared to most, but it's really getting a bit old now. >I do not like preprocessors for analysis. Idem >I may analyze a position when the computer say that white have an advantage when >after castling the computer suddenly say that black has an advantage when it >cannot see deeper. > >I know that not all the programs behave like this. Oh well another zillion things go wrong with preprocessors, the big ADVANTAGE is however that computerchess is hard, so making a good non-preprocessor is real hard, where making a preprocessing kind of thing is very easy to debug and it finds shots fast. >Amir admitted that there are cases when Junior is a preprocessor but Amir hope >to get rid of it. Oh well, Amir will face a real big problem then. He searched this championship 17 ply. He searched also 17 ply at a quad xeon in paderborn. So obviously he has not slowed down Junior. Obviously Junior is a big preprocessor still, and its qsearch probably is still statically oriented. It sure is real good in seeing its opponents attacking chances, like it saw that a direct Bg7 against DIEP would be refuted with Qg5! >I also read that Fritz also behave better about this(I read that Fritz does >hardly evaluations in the root). Fritz sure is nowadays very aggressive. This is however partly explained by a more patzer-a-look-like attitude of evaluation of it. I noticed it really evaluates some simple heuristics very high, like just a half open file to the opponent king is given a real high bonus, no matter what the rest of the board looks like. >I know also from my experience that chessmaster is not a preprocessor. It sure doesn't make that impression :) >>with a reasonable book i predict tiger to overrun shredder. >You forget the fact that shredder can also improve the book. Oh well i would expect a 90% score for Shredder when it uses the tiger book against tiger with the shredder book. ><snipped> >>maybe shredder is now 10 points above tiger and shredder and fritz. > >I understand that you mean above tiger,Rebel and Fritz. >The standard error is clearly bigger than 10 elo(even if you have some hundreds >of tournament time control games) so if you say maybe 10 elo better it can be 40 >elo better and can be 20 elo worse. Let's not argue about 10 to 20 points. Shredder had 0.5 points more, so that's like 100 points more as the rest? >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.