Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 10:34:15 04/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2002 at 12:41:41, stuart taylor wrote: >HA HA HA HA! >I would also like to add regarding this subject, that I was sure that >programmers know how to maximise the chessplaying level of their programmes for >specific time allowances. i think many programmers play on the level of hardware the ssdf use. there are exceptions. christophe said he uses fast blitz games. >e.g. a program laden with knowledge might play incredibly great chess at >tournament timings, but be very weak at blitz, yes. i do believe that a slow program plays weak at fast time controls. and gets stronger in relation the more search depth it gets. but depends on the pruning. you can only find out with testing it out. >and may be weaker even at >tournament timings on an old XT than the good programs were of then (e.g. Langs >Psion, perhaps). >S.Taylor yes. i think hiarcs 2 was not so good in blitz games. hiarcs7.32 was much better. i cannot say anything so far concerning hiarcs8. but hiarcs2 was IMO not so good in games <1 minute per move. genius2 was better in this field. at that time. they used 486-33 or faster.
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.