Author: Peter Berger
Date: 14:07:05 12/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2001 at 14:04:24, Christophe Theron wrote: >120-150 amateur Winboard chess engines, 90%-95% of them being essentially >partial Crafty clones (I mean using the same techniques, or only a subset of the >same techniques). How do you know? Some Harry Potter trick ? Alorama. > >I know you love these engines, but I fail to see what they are doing for the >general audience interest. > Well - where did support of tablebases come from ? Book learning ? Or let's talk about the GUI and the features : are all the commercial providing better stuff than what you can get for free ? >They are great achievements by the programmers, and I would not deny that. I >know how a programmer feels when its engine works and starts winning games. I >have felt the same several years ago, so I know they are proud and they are >rightly so. > >But I view them essentially as personal achievements. They will be a >contribution to computer chess only if their author keeps on developping them >for 5 to 10 more years and if they manage to achieve major performance boosts >with NEW techniques. > I think you are right with most of the very new developments. But there is a lot in the amateur world that is original and not done by commercials so far. I know about some things in Patzer for example or some things in Yace - and this is only what _I_ know as a user ( it is safe to assume that we are talking about a _very_ small subset of the real thing here) . I could try to babble about some things done by Gerrit Reubold in Bringer, too. Why isn't it enough to be at the top ? Is it really necessary to discard the efforts of others who can only afford to spend so much less time in their work ? Regards, pete
This page took 0.01 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.