Author: Brian Kostick
Date: 07:08:33 02/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
John,
I of course can only offer opinion. I am too short on experience and fact to
do more. I don't think it's overly important for Chessmaster to have a large
book as many claim. The mentality seems to be always bigger and more power but I
do not know if this is true. With other programs I've seen 12.5 to 130 Meg or
more. But what happens with a small book and the line ends? I think maybe if it
is a common line then the engine will lose some time by having to start
computation early. Perhaps a question to ask ones self is: Do I trust the engine
to pick up competently where the book leaves off?
In the latest cm8000.obk I do see that 1.Nc3 is given some weight. I perhaps
would not do that, of course my preference for tournament play. Also it seemd
some other chess programs have competion book mode, or computer vs. computer
books. This might indicate a preference to tune to engine style or maybe a
preference for "open" lines, as some claim chess engines to prefer?
I try to understand as much as possible about chessmaster and how it works,
yet I'm not sure if Randomness in the personality affect the opening book in
some way?? If it does not affect opening book then of course we can forget about
it for the purpose of your question. I think an in-depth tutorial on the custom
personality settings would be well received. I only recall some talk about Trans
Table. Without background info I find Selective Search and Randomness the
hardest to grasp while others seem more self-explanitory.
Maybe you can pick out a useful thought from my rambling, if not I apologize in
advance. Brian K.
On February 19, 2001 at 15:24:37, John Merlino wrote:
>It has long been said that the opening book that the Chessmaster personality
>uses (and has used for the last several versions) is particularly weak. Some
>have called it horrible. The development team for the next version of
>Chessmaster (don't laugh) has already started the process of getting the book
>fixed/improved, and would like to hear your comments, if you have any.
>
>Does anybody have any concrete evidence of any data in the opening book that is
>incorrect or bad? Or of any knowledge holes in the book? If you DO have any
>specific instances of bad data in the book, please let me know by e-mail (or
>post here, if you aren't SURE that the moves are bad, and want your suspicions
>discussed).
>
>Many thanks,
>
>jm
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.