Author: James T. Walker
Date: 12:17:09 05/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 06, 2002 at 13:42:28, Peter Berger wrote: >On May 06, 2002 at 13:23:03, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On May 06, 2002 at 06:30:59, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>Is Shredder the biggest punisher of mistakes and innacuracies of the opponent? >> >>i have the feeling. it is very sensible for you making mistakes. >>it is not a tactics finder IMO. it also sees positional mistakes of you. >>but, it is ONE thing to see them, and another thing to use this for winning. >> >>i don't think shredder is a big plan maker. >>it behaves and remembers me much on genius in this field. >> >> >>>If so, that should make it quite interesting. Is it like an upgrade of genius? >> >>IMO. yes. in the moment. >> >> >>>You also make Hiarcs sound very tempting. >> >> >>>All independant of who actually wins more. >> >> >>the games with hiarcs, no matter who wins, no matter if the opponent if fritz or >>shredder or century or or or or or... >> >>are the best computerchess i have seen for YEARS by now. >> >>i am still wondering why this is. >> >>i can only imagine that mark has worked different way than the others. >>or that he has not copied the state of the art stuff the others did, but >>done something different. >> >>whatever. >> >>never i have seen those games. it reminds me on old times of computerchess, >>saitek machines versus novag, or fidelity versus mephisto ! >> >>wow !!! >> >>this is nice. and i wonder that nobody recoignized. people post results but >>nobody talks about the games or the evaluations. >> >>why ? >> >>would be interesting to talk about the different evaluations ! >> >>if you don't have hiarcs8 yet: buy it. >>there is no alternative IMO. > >That's quite a fine example for the problem judging engine strengths and >weaknesses by a few games only I think . I have now seen Hiarcs 8 playing >exactly 6 games on my computers so far and the results and also the games >themselves were quite miserable IMHO ( it scored 1.5/6 against some of the >stronger amateur engines with a 12 % hardware speed advantage in slowish >standard games) - if it was some random engine I tried for the first time I >probably would have the first impression that it doesn't belong to the absolute >amateur top. As I know it is Hiarcs 8 I think it is _very_ likely that it will >play much better, more impressive and more successful games very soon - but so >far it definitely hasn't at my place. > >Greetings, >Peter Hello Peter, Can you post or email me the 6 games? I find your comment quite disturbing. I don't believe Hiarcs 7.32 would do that and I'm amazed that Hiarcs 8 would. I know 6 games is a small sample but it's off to a very bad start! Jim
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.