Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:40:01 09/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 11, 2000 at 00:18:28, Peter Skinner wrote: >On September 10, 2000 at 23:57:21, Jason Williamson wrote: > >>On September 10, 2000 at 22:13:08, Pete Galati wrote: >> >>>On September 10, 2000 at 21:52:20, Peter Skinner wrote: >>> >>>>On September 10, 2000 at 18:56:01, Mogens Larsen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 10, 2000 at 18:45:07, Peter Skinner wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Gandalf is not smp. And yes I expected Gandalf to do better as well. >>>>> >>>>>At least Christian has the integrity not to hide the results or invent a lot of >>>>>excuses on Gandalf's behalf. Not exactly the picture we see when Crafty is being >>>>>severely beaten by a commercial program. >>>>> >>>>>And yes, I had hoped for a better result as well, but chess is chess and Crafty >>>>>isn't exactly a weak program. Win or lose, I like the way it plays chess. >>>>> >>>>>Mogens. >>>> >>>>Oh I agree fully. I just expected Gandalf to do a bit better. Close series, and >>>>still good results... I also agree Crafty is not a weak program, that was not my >>>>intention to be relayed. I was just surprised by the result. >>>> >>>>But in any case, Gandalf does have problems with Crafty, and Fritz 6. It handles >>>>everything else pretty reasonably. >>> >>>I'd say maybe we shouldn't be so suprised that it was so close. Usually when >>>you buy a comercial program (I guess not in this case though) what you end up >>>paying for usually is the features in an interface, and although comercial >>>programs tend to be a bit more refined (maybe not the word) you don't end up >>>getting a big increase in strength over the best freeware. >>> >>>I wish them all the luck in the world selling Gandalf, but it's might be a bit >>>of a tough sale (or is that sail?). Could help to open up a new kind of market. >>> >>>Pete >> >> >>Actually, I am quite tempted to buy Gandalf. Because it is winboard,that means >>it is much more compatible with other programs and therefore more useful to me. >> >>JW > >I agree, there are not to many commercial programs that can be _easily_ >interfaced with Winboard. That to me a very good selling feature. I like to see evaluation of both programs when I look at comp-comp games. chessbase interface gives it and in the games that were posted there were no evaluation of the programs. I usually want to look at the point that the evaluation was changed because it helps me to find the point that programs went wrong. I never saw evaluation of programs in games that were played under winboard and this is the reason that I prefer chessbase interface or looking at games played with an autoplayer when I can at least see the evaluation of one of the programs(if it is one of the chessbase engines or another program that can give pgn only with evaluations and times like shredder). 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.