Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Is Hiarcs 8 a Disappointment?

Author: Vine Smith

Date: 22:34:36 05/07/02

Go up one level in this thread


On May 07, 2002 at 19:56:28, John Reynolds wrote:

>I have seen some negative remarks about hiarcs, is it as much a disappointment
>as some say?

It depends on what you're expecting. If you have believed Chessbase's claims
that this is the most "positional" or "human" of all engines, perhaps you might
be. One of its games posted here, at 30 min./game, I believe, with Shredder 6.02
as White, started 1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 (the Chigorin French) Nc6 3.Nf3 Be7? (Hiarcs'
book must have ended here, but that's no excuse for not finding 3...e5, the
clear intent behind 2...Nc6), and Hiarcs went on to play a later ...Nh6,
answered by Bxh6 ...gxh6, and then it castled into the destroyed kingside (the
exact sequence I remember, but can't swear to was 4.d4 d5 5.e5 f6 6.Be3 fxe5
7.dxe5 Nh6? 8.Bxh6 gxh6 9.Nc3 O-O?)! Just one example, but there have been
others, and it does not appear to be especially distinguished as a positional
player (although other engines are certainly capable of these kinds of errors).
On the other hand, the search capabilities appear to be much improved, so it
should be more on a par with other Chessbase engines than the previous version
7.32. If it searches well enough, it could even wind up atop the SSDF rating
list. Just don't expect it to find any deep positional concepts, or amaze you
with its "natural" play. If any engine seems most "positional", to me at least,
it's Junior 7, despite its reputation for being more of a tactician.

Regards,
Vine Smith



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.