Author: william penn
Date: 01:41:06 05/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 30, 2001 at 04:25:28, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On May 30, 2001 at 02:57:04, william penn wrote: > >> I Would agree with you Christophe if your opponent was century3, or junior6, >>or even say Shredder5, but CM8000, HAS a losing record, not only in the ssdf, >>but in tournament play. Look at the recent cct3 results, a top program just >>would do better then this, if infact it is a top program. > >Chessmaster didn't participate in CCT-3, so I fail to see the point of your >reasoning. > >>I PREDICT THE FINAL >>SCORE WILL BE SIMILIAR IF NOT IDENTICAL TO THE DEEP FRITZ CM8000 MATCH. I Wish >>everyone would just admit the truth, CM8000 IS Simply weaker then it's >>predessor, this happened also with mchess7 and mchess8, although the difference >>between them was not as great as between cm8000 and cm6000. > >CM8000 might be weaker or even significantly weaker than CM6000. For that >matter, it could just as well be stronger. Without results noone knows, which >have been mentioned quite a few times by now. However, you can't make any such >conclusions based on the results of CM8000 alone. As a matter of fact, the lack >of an updated opening book, learning and tablebases are significant >disadvantages in this day and age. And it guarantees an absolute loss to all >semi-recent engines given the SSDF match format IMO. That would most likely >apply to CM6000 as well. > >Regards, >Mogens Well Chessmaster 6000 doesn't have all the learning features and book as well, yet it placed number 1 on ssdf, so i fail to see your reasoning. Anyway i thought the book and learning, ect, are part of the program? If Cm8000 lacks those things , then that's part of its weakness. i think Cm 6000 participated in a one tournament of note recently and it took third place, a very good result for such an old program.
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.