Author: Mike S.
Date: 15:57:10 11/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2000 at 18:28:27, Peter Ackermann wrote: >I agree fully with your opinion that for chcking engines/programmes it is much >better if the analysis is done front-back like in real play! But it is a pity >that the good functiong "Compare engines" (Enginevergleich) in the Fritz-6-GUI >is done from back to front! If I want to check out that Hiarcs would have seen I >have no possibility because all the good moves played later in the game Hiarcs >knows already! (...) Yes, but... for analysis in general, this is the obvious advantage of the backwards method. That compare engines uses this too, is indeed questionable I think. The title of the function indicates, that the engine's performances are the main interest, and not the game itself (?). There could even be doubt, if the comparison back-front gives an equal impression than front-back. It seems to me that programs with a smaller node rate could have an advantage here, compared to the usual situation - at least when the hash size is below power user level. Maybe you should ask ChessBase about this (I don't have F6 yet)... what does the manual or the help file say about the purpose of "compare engines"? Maybe I should re-read the reviews. Regards, M.Scheidl
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.