Author: Dan Homan
Date: 15:05:25 10/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
Power Chess 98 seems to have a wonderful handicapping system. I am not sure what they do, but I really like playing against it. - Dan On October 23, 2000 at 15:50:07, Robert Pawlak wrote: >A number of factors have lead to me to recently take another look at the state >of playing programs. Sure, we've got stronger engines than ever, but it seems as >though no one has yet to develop a really good method for handicapping program >strength. > >Some of you may remember a recent thread here that discussed the use of weaker >Winboard engines for play against humans. So there are some people that find it >difficult to get a good game out of their commercial software. By "good" I mean >a game in which the poor software owner does not get blown off the board in 30 >moves or less. > >I've made a partial list of the current crop of commercial engines, along with >what I believe are issues with the ability to handicap engine play for each: > >Chessmaster 6000/7000 - Blunders away material early on in the game, then plays >like the All Mighty until it's opponent is crushed. > >Fritz 6 - Still plays too quickly on the ELO handicaping levels. Tends to leave >it's king in the middle of the board in friend mode. The Sparring setting can >sometimes be interesting, howver, it seems to play very well in the absence of >tactical threats... > >Rebel - ELO handicapping used to work pretty well. Indeed I thought Rebel was >the best in this respect. But now I have trouble due to a faster >machine/different CPU. In general, it plays a very strong game, even at the >lower ELO levels (and with few, if any, tactical mistakes). > >There are plenty of other programs (i.e. Shredder) that do not support ELO >handicapping at all. > >Clearly, program strength sells. And it seems to be where everyone's interest >is. But I really think a bit more attention needs to be paid to satisfying those >of us that are not Masters, and really want to use a playing program for it's >intended purpose! > >Can someone tell me why there is not more emphasis placed on this aspect of >engine design? The obvious answer is that it is not very glamorous, and >therefore cannot be used to sell a program. But let's set this excuse aside for >a momement. Is it mostly that there is no perceived need, or is it a problem >with calibration, testing, or handicapping methods? Is there a solution? > >Does anyone even care? Sometimes it seems as though most people reading this >board are playing engine matches, and not really playig against the programs >themselves. And that's fine, but is it representative of what the typical player >expects from his/her software? > >Bob Pawlak
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.