Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 10:34:01 10/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 04, 2000 at 13:04:24, Uri Blass wrote:
>On October 04, 2000 at 10:14:49, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On October 04, 2000 at 00:35:34, Timothy J. Frohlick wrote:
>>
>>>On October 03, 2000 at 20:46:43, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>Err.. exactly _what_ program won't kick a GM at blitz? I have seen GNU do it.
>>>>I have seen everybody else do it too...
>>>>
>>>>This is hardly a distinguishing event.
>>>
>>>Dr. Hyatt,
>>>
>>>You are correct. One game does not mean much. Gambit Tiger made it look so
>>>easy though and Mecking made some decent moves. We will see how good this
>>>program is within the next six months.
>>>
>>>The audience that will be buying these type of programs will be most amused by
>>>the style of play of Gambit Tiger. I am certain that you would enjoy it too.
>>>
>>>
>>>Tim Frohlick
>>
>>My impression after watching hundreds of games between the new beta versions
>>and Crafty is that it is very solid, has filled a couple of horrible endgame
>>holes in the previous version, but I have not noticed any tendency to wildly
>>attack at all. At least against Crafty on ICC and chess.net.
>
>My understanding is that Gambit tiger and the default version are different.
>
>I understood that gambit tiger is weaker than the default version of tiger
>because the programmer had not enough time to work on tuning the evaluation and
>it is going to be an option for the users to give them impression about the next
>version of tiger.
>
>Uri
Gambit Tiger has been published in Rebel-Tiger II beta 2 Sunday evening. That's
why Bob has not seen it playing yet.
I thought it was weaker than the standard engine, but I'm not sure anymore. The
beta testers are reporting much better results than I expected...
I'm very surprised.
Christophe
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.