Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Engines for Correspondence vs Post-Mortem Analyses

Author: Martin Schubert

Date: 13:02:44 11/15/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 15, 2000 at 15:48:24, Bob Durrett wrote:

>On November 15, 2000 at 12:04:53, Martin Schubert wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>It depends what you're using a program for. The best program for analysing your
>>(already played) games must not be the best program for correspondence games.
>>
>>Martin
>
>Fritz has a feature, as almost everybody knows, which will analyze a single
>position in great detail [if settings are right] overnight.  I have never used
>that because I don't play correspondence chess, but perhaps many people do.
>
>Fritz also allows you to use the computer overnight while you are away from the
>computer to analyze a set of games.  Very useful as a starting point for
>subsequent analyses [with or without the help of Fritz].  I use this a lot to
>spot my errors, in games I failed to win, with the aim of "doing better next
>time."
>
>For each case, discussed separately, does anyone know whether or not use of
>Fritz is not best?  Should some other software be chosen instead of Fritz?
>
>What is the difference between the ways a computer would be programmed for each
>case?  Is it likely that a program optimized for one of these two cases would be
>sub-optimal for the other use?

The options don't help if the proposed moves don't help. In some closed position
sFritz has no idea how to play.



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.