Author: Ferdinand S. Mosca
Date: 02:56:54 07/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 10, 2001 at 22:39:57, Bobby Ang wrote: >I use chess software not so much to play against them, nor play them against >each other, but rather to use them as engines within Chessbase to analyze games. > I have been doing this for at least 8 years and believe that I am not too bad >at this. > >My hardware is an Athlon 1.2 gig 512 RAM, and until recently my favorite >analysis partner has been HiArcs7.32 > >Fritz used to be my favorite, but I have been dissatisfied with it ever since >they came out with Fritz6. With all the additional knowledge they put into it >they also seem to be "dumbed" down its tactical alertness. It started missing a >lot of tactical shots which is crucial if you are studying a particular opening. > >Talking about tactical shots Gambit Tiger 2.0 is awesome, but some of its >positional evaluation is greatly suspect. > >I believe Shredder 5.32 should only be used in the endgame. In the opening and >middlegame its tactics is VERY bad. In the endgame, though, I have no >reservations about stating that it is in a class by itself. Hello Bobby, Right, I believe these engines are not designed to analyze a position, but to play a game from start to finish. It is nice you have all the sets of these programs, hopefully have already determined which of them are good on what positions which is the most crucial part of using these programs to a maximum on the type of mode you are engaging to. The difficult part also here is you can not just say that one is good in opening or middle game or endgame, but a partial or complete evaluation of what type of position arise on the board/type of pieces remaining/number of pieces remaining/etc is needed. Classification of position is very important. Like which engine is good in handling Q+B+p's, or the great in rook and pawn ending (S5.32), or better in queenless positions, the brilliant in attacking a king (GT2), the best handler of passers (Crafty), best in closed postions, best in scoring a position (if drawish/winning, the score would reflect). From experience you have had, I would like to ask which of them do you prefer on what type of positions. > >Junior 7, I am happy to say, has impressed me very much both with its tactics >and positional soundness. If it were not for the two problems given below I >would instantly recommend it to any of my students (both of the problems are >when you run it as an engine within Chessbase 8) : > > 1. If you are analyzing a position and then decide, for example, to do another >operation, for example open a book window to check whether a certain move has >been played before, oftentimes it would crash. > > 2. So the best thing is to close the analysis window first before accessing the >book window. Problem is, it takes forever to unload the junior 7 engine. > >I use 184 MEG hash tables, and maybe decreasing the hash would make it "unload" >faster, but the other engines have no problem with unloading and of course you >would want to make use of the maximum power available from your hardware. What OS do you use? Regards, Dinan > >Anybody else have a similar experience? > >bobby ang
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.