Author: Dirk Frickenschmidt
Date: 14:35:49 03/14/98
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 1998 at 15:33:01, Thorsten Czub wrote: High Thorsten, Enrique had written: >>So, strong (quantity)? Fritz 5 is strong: scores well = high Elo. And you answered: >I don't think it is strong. >Your formula is logical, but not true. Many things in our life are >logical, but not true. >>Soul? Well... not my favorite engine for my pleasure. Mchess, Virtual, >>Rebel, Hiarcs I enjoy better. > >This is, IMO , not a question of TASTE ! Sorry, but I think some common sense could help to keep things apart which should not be mixed up completely in that way. 1. We have empiric facts. Here Enrique is completely right. a) the SSDF autoplayer results b) the games Moritz Berger played earlier which had *very* clear results and had *nothing* biased or questinable about them. c) some game and test impressions of my own I told you and others *long* ago. I then said I regarded Fritz5 as a Top5 program. And this from my P133/12Megabyte hash games and tests!!! You knew all this very well and since quite a while. 2. We have one more empiric fact :-) You *never* in all our private and public discussions, on phone or in the internet, would admit that Fritz5 might be a strong program. The reason was easily obvoius to anyone talking with you: you don't like how it plays and you don't like the basic ideas behind its playing. 3. We have contradicting game results. Most of them all show in one direction: Moritz games SSDF Games Hallsworth games My engine games (on meanwhile a P200MMX with 64Meg) ICC server games on faster time controls reported here. These are only those I see at one glance. And they all show a similar playing strength at the very top. On the other hand you have been playing some games with other results. At least you can imagine Fritz5 to be 40 Elo stronger than Fritz4! Now compare the data and do what you normally always did and did very well: get a realistic impression! I agree with you that if looking at games Fritz *would* always play like a dumb nut, it could hardly get a high rating. But whoever would say that Fritz did so would have no idea of chess! Fritz5 simply does not have to play chess the way you or i undertsand or like. It just is designed to calculate fast, play strong and win. 4. Finally we have taste. Here we are quite close. Just like you I would never prefer Fritz5 to Hiarcs6 or Rebel9 based on some perfomance Elos. And even Junior's often cool and calm positionals moves attract me more often than Fritz5s. Nevertheless I can admit that it is strong, and nevertheless I can like the high aestetic value of many of its deep combinations or tricky denfending moves. So I ask you simply to open your mind and leave one of the few really fat prejudices you had since I know you. As I told you in a private letter, I often learned from your well done obeservations concerning strength and playing style of *many* programs. I gladly repeat this in public. And that you were one of the first again telling us how strong Nimzo98 really is... So give in for once and let's drink a cool, blonde Pils when we meet next :-) You know how this works, giving in? :-))) Yours Dirk
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.