Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 10:03:57 04/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 09, 1998 at 10:54:35, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Hi Mats: >You are absolutely right. Fritz vis a vis computers has nothing to do >with Fritz vis a vis humans. And this point to one of the distortion of >the industry: ratings as SSDF are considered the last, authoritative >word, as if programs were made to play programs. What's the sense of >that? We, not programs, are whoy purchase programs. I am a 2100 elo >player and regularly at least I draw againts Fritz 5 precisely on the >ground of his silly positional play and if I lose is because of a silly >tactical mistake, so silly things always happnes with fritz 5. To be >fair I believe F5 is better than F4 in this aspect, and besides has a >lot of good points in the non-engine side of the program, but in terms >of pleasure based on the game in itself, I rate a lot higher Mchess any >version, Hiarcs and CSTAL. I guess different people look for different things in programs. For instance, there is nothing better than Fritz 5 to analyze tactical positions or to play blitz. Even for human-program playing, to a great extent it’s a matter of taste. You may prefer Mchess or CST, while others will enjoy better a more even program like Rebel or Hiarcs. GUI and features are also important to most. I don’t think personal preferences in playing style is the criteria of truth. I think chess programs are meant to play chess, against people and against other programs. The inability to score well against programs shows weak points and is something to take into consideration too, particularly by this kind of perfectionist freaks we all are. Enrique
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.