Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 16:21:56 10/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2000 at 19:10:12, Jorge Pichard wrote: >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 interested in reading your analysis, simply click here: > >http://correspondencechess.com/campbell/ham/ham.htm For players rated over 2400 which program do you recommend, or should I say give you the toughest games? >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.