Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 19:17:17 12/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2001 at 17:28:56, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>I don't think that the categorization "commercial programs vs amateurs" with
>regard to algoritms makes too much sense. This is, because I think that the
>commercial engines differ a lot from each other.
>
>From observing the programs' analysis I conclude, that the differences between
>Shredder, Fritz, Tiger´, Genius, Hiarcs ... are really huge. Each commercial
>engine is very original; I expect that any of these uses some quite original
>technique.
>
>The important thing is that the authors succeeded in making their engines strong
>and thus they could go commercially. But I guess they have reached this goal
>going quite different ways.
>
>IMHO, the reasons for their success is twofold:
>1. they are spending a lot of time and efforts in systematical testing and
>tuning;
>2. the authors are quite talented,
>
>where (2) is IMO at least as important as (1).
That's right.
>I suspect that the amateur engines on the other hand show more similarities with
>each other. This is because most of them are young and the authors profited from
>open source (mainly crafty) and open discussion in the fora.
I agree with this too.
Christophe
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.