Author: stuart taylor
Date: 17:22:33 05/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 2001 at 21:48:58, Terry McCracken wrote: >On May 28, 2001 at 19:20:34, stuart taylor wrote: > >>On May 28, 2001 at 18:46:27, Alan Grotier wrote: >> >>> >>>Yes, all serious human chess players study standard and current openings and >>>each have their own preferences. >>>So,therefore a chess program must also have access to the same standard and >>>current openings which it will use to it's advantage: built in opening books. >>> >>>Now, when a "quelconque" program wins because the loser was out-booked I start >>>to wonder which was really the strongest engine. >>> >>>As a consumer,I would like to have no book comp.vs comp. results. >>>Then I would like the possibilty to add whatever opening book library >>>to the program of my preferance. >>> >>>Salutations:Alain >> >>I feel the same way, as I've mentioned on numerous occasions. >> >>S.Taylor > >Too bad more people don't heed your posts, as testing without books is the >_only_ way of knowing the strength of a given chess engine without the help >of books databases etc. > >Good Thread!;) > >Terry MY posts? Yes, of course! But people don't seem to bite off more than they can chew!!! S.Taylor
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.