Author: Odd Gunnar Malin
Date: 02:55:23 05/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2002 at 05:42:46, stuart taylor wrote: >On May 08, 2002 at 04:52:20, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>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? >> >> >>i have results with 2 autoplayer pairs. >>one 400 mhz autoplayer pair. one 1200 mhz autoplayer pair. >> >>i do always play 40/120 games. >> >> >>in this setting, hiarcs is as strong as fritz, shredder , junior, ... > >THAT'S something QUITE different to the impression people are giving, if its >true. Does that mean that at half an hour per move, it could be consistently >STRONGER than the other programs? If so, I wouldn't bother upgrading from Hiarcs >8.0 for another 5-10 years, as it will only get better and better with faster >hardware, without further intervention, at Blitz too. When I have observed strong engines very late in a suddendeath game, eg. blitz mode in Fritz or rapid chess (30/g, 60/g etc.) for the rest of us, there seems to be very much luck/blundermove involved. I thought of this as bad timemanagement for the engine, but perhaps if one study the trend, the slowest (nps) searcher is the most unlucky engine. Odd Gunnar (Without reading the fight between Thorsten and Chessfun, it could be this he have notice.)
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.