Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 16:10:12 10/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2000 at 18:28:03, Stephen Ham wrote: >Dear Jorge, > >I've been playing 2 correspondence games apiece against both Fritz 6a and Nimzo >7.32. See the Campbell Report at the Correspondence Chess.com site for these >games. As such, the chess engines were mated to a Pentium III 500 computer and >allowed to compute for 17-22 hours per move. > >My perceptions were that Nimzo 7.32 was the superior tactician while I sensed >that Fritz 6a had greater technical skills. In short, Fritz seemed "smarter" >than Nimzo, but Nimzo was the better tactician...it's certainly naturally more >agressive. However Nimzo 7.32's clear weakness was in static positions. This is >in stark contrast to what you wrote, so perhaps the perceived difference is due >to the extended time given the chess engines to operate, versus OTB time >control. > >All the best, > >Stephen Ham I just read your comments of your historic match against both engines in correspondence time control. I believe that Dr. Chrilly Donninger has improved his latest version of Nimzo 8 in static positions, if not there is still time to improve it. For others interest in reading your amalysis, simply click here: http://correspondencechess.com/campbell/ham/ham.htm Pichard.
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.