Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Yes, Patzer really seem to be quite something...

Author: Djordje Vidanovic

Date: 18:55:14 06/07/98

Go up one level in this thread


On June 07, 1998 at 16:10:18, Albert Silver wrote:

>You chose a curious example. I half expected a game in which Patzer
>dominated it's opponent, but instead the opposite is true. Up until
>27.Be2? and 28.Bh5?? Genius had a crushing position and a little
>patience would probably have reaped it's fruits. Instead the program
>hallucinates badly with 27.Be2? and then 28.Bh5?? (it should have just
>gone back to c4 at that point) and this gives it a lost position. But I
>didn't find Patzer's play very impressive here.

Just like Fernando, I go along with what you said, about Patzer's rather
mediocre performance here. However, there's something about Patzer's
drawing Patzer's problem with the version that Fernando uses was
time-allocation, something that bothered Fernando too... I am happy to
say that the time-allocation problem has been solved by Roland and
Fernando will soon get a copy of that new Patzer that will, hopefully,
play better.  Genius 5 is an extremely strong opponent, especially at
the time controls used by Fernando, so I think that Patzer's draw is at
least indicative of its potential.

Regards,

Djordje.



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.