Author: Chuck
Date: 23:16:35 05/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 03, 2002 at 10:21:24, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 03, 2002 at 09:53:31, George Sobala wrote: > >>On May 03, 2002 at 03:29:44, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>On May 03, 2002 at 02:53:25, George Sobala wrote: >>> >>>>My very preliminary and unscientific assessment of Hiarcs8: the engine possesses >>>>certain human-like qualities when playing against other engines, (Fritz 6 to be >>>>precise) >>>> >>>>That is: >>>> >>>>1. It does better the longer the time control. >>>> >>>>2. It does not do well (+5 -9 =7) in a match (20+0) from the Nunn2 positions - >>>>which are tactically sharp. It does much better when playing from its opening >>>>book. >>> >>>Why should the inability of Hiarcs8 to understand the Nunn2 positions be a prove >>>of human-like quality? If so, the contrary is the case, since an average human >>>player is more or less able to find a sound plan in the Nunn2 positions even he >>>does not know the opening. >>>Kurt >> >>I see your point. But as a human - what sort of position against Fritz would you >>prefer, or expect to do better with - a tactically sharp one or a positional >>one? >> >>It is interesting how poorly Hiarcs8 seemed to do against Fritz6 in the Nunn2 >>positions - to compare with the above result, Hiarcs just achieved +8 -3 =0 >>against Fritz6 on the same machine (Duron 800), but this time both engines used >>their own opening books (at 10+0, though). Perhaps Fritz6 is better in seeing >>its way through tactically complex positions, Hiarcs prefers to accumulate small >>advantages. Of course the first match result could have been a statistical >>freak. > > >Your reply suggest that you do not see his point. > >He claims that hiarcs was unable to find a positional plan in the nunn2 match >that an average human has no problem to see. > How does the fact that Hiarcs 8 lost a Nunn 2 match correlate to an inablility to find good plans, especially when Fritz most likely won on tactics in the first place (suffering as all progs do from an inability to develop a long-range plan). Chuck >He did not claim that hiarcs was unable to find tactical ideas. > > >I also do not see how +8 -3 against Fritz6 at 10 0 suggests that hiarcs is doing >better at longer time control. > >This is a fantastic result in blitz time control. > >I guess that hiarcs was lucky because you need to be clearly better than Fritz7 >to expect 8-3 against Fritz6 and Hiarcs8 is not clearly better than Fritz7 based >on other posts and it even lost 2-0 against yace at time control that is clearly >slower than 10 0 and yace is clearly weaker than Fritz7. > >Uri
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.