Author: Dirk Frickenschmidt
Date: 17:30:30 12/13/97
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 1997 at 13:14:48, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>c) the positions should all in all not favour a certain kind of play, >>but give sharp tactical programs (Fritz, CM 5000 etc) similar chances >>like more "positional" playing ones (Rebel, Hiarcs) or the calm counter >>punchers (Genius etc). I'm of course using all these rather dumb >>descriptions cum grano salis, because program differences cannot be >>described in too simple patterns today. >>(so hi Thorsten, I fear you must finally say goodbye to the old clichee >>the "two" forces of the holy light of the "knowledge" republic and the >>dark forces of the empire of "the fast searchers"). :-) > >Definetely NOT ! The differencation of >Fritz/Nimzo from the rest of the "intelligent" group >(Junior, Virtual2, Shredder2, Mchess7, Rebel9, Hiarcs6) is from my point >of view maybe old fashioned, but not wrong. Of course also the >intelligent programs were able to profit from new search-ideas. Of >course they also try to make their program faster (Chris is an exception >here...:-) but it is not so far to speak from a day when Fritz5 and >Nimzo3.5 will be in ONE group with the intelligent ones. > >I know the high NPS of Rebel and Junior confuses many people, but thats >not my problem. I have replayed the Paris games and I do not believe a >second that you can call junior as stupid as fritz. Sorry Moritz, Dirk, >Matthias, but only my opinion. >I do not say goodbye to the dualistic point of view in >computerchess...not yet. So you admitted that "intelligent" programs can be fast searchers. Why not admit that fast searchers like Fritz5 or Nimzo98 can play "intelligent" - whatever this means...? I laughed when I saw Fritz2 play great combinations and positional blunders in the next move. Later since Fritz4 I began to see some "intelligent" positional play from the program here and there, and now Fritz5 makes hardly less "intelligent" proposals in GM game anylysis than other top programs - if you take the average rate of good move proposals in well annotated Grandmaster games. Maybe it's similar with Nimzo98? So the old pattern in my eyes has already have become increasingly obsolete since two or three years and will probably become even more untrue in the future. It's not the question which way you use to do something proper as long as you succeed to do it proper. You can like one way more than the other. But you have to have respect good results and acknowledge improvements - this can be no matter of some principal dualistic ideology. And by the way, *any* of the "intelligent" programs will not have an easy advantage in a long match against Fritz5 with big hash. Of course you know that from testgames as well as I do. If not, I guess(!) the SSDF-list may cause some surprise for you some day. Fritz5 plays some kinds of positions better than others, but this is still nearly as much true for any other top program. None of them has a totally balanced overall performance, each has weaknesses and amoung them positional ones... But of course we just exchange views we know quite well from each other and probably still tell our grandchildren :-) All the best from Dirk P.S. By the way, didn't you notice how much Fritz really improved a lot if you take a look at the P a w n s t r u c t u r e s? :-))))) (Sorry folks, this is an allusion only Thorsten will understand)
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.