Author: stuart taylor
Date: 15:05:10 06/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 31, 2002 at 18:27:58, Ron Langeveld wrote: >On May 31, 2002 at 06:50:56, stuart taylor wrote: > >>For me, the experiment is over. Hiarcs does not look especially great at higher >>time controls. Even if it would win a match like this (although it is looking a >>bit doubtful) it is clear that it does not excell at this time allowance. >> Maybe at an hour per move it would, but the indications for that are also >>nothing special, as this is not showing any movement in that direction either. >> >>So, in spite of the one or two brilliances which Hiarcs 8.0 might be capable >>of, as written about in Uniaks article, I don't know if I want to buy it for >>that alone. >>S.Taylor > >Too bad you are only looking at "statistics" from 5 (?) games instead of using >your own knowledge of chess in order to evaluate what Hiarcs' strongpoints are. >Imho it is not the tournament book, because that really sucks, so for starters >it should have been replaced. With the results starting off like this, it is hard to believe that Hiarcs will have atleast 75% wins over Fritz even after 1000 games. And that was what I was wanting to find out, and I feel satisfied now that it cannot be. I'm not saying that it cannot beat Fritz with 51%. Before these 5 games had been completed, I was not yet convinced. Now I AM. To evaluate the strongpoints of Hiarcs, yes, that would probably be very interesting, and I havn't done that yet. But the statistics show in any case, that even if potential is there, it is not perfected yet (far beyond other programs, in very long time allotments) in this version of Hiarcs. S.Taylor
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.