Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 08:50:01 06/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 06, 2002 at 18:22:46, Kevin Strickland wrote: please show me games from crafty at world champs where it helped. the only forum where i see tablebases help incredible much is at the online blitz games. i would say the worse a programs endgame evaluation is, the more it has to rely upon them. the programs you mention are pretty good in endgame, assuming you mean tiger2 and not tiger1 and that you mean the latest fritz7 version and not 6 or before. >I have been running engine matches, as well as an account on ICC with different >engines and have noticed somethings. > >1. Crafty greatly improves in the endgame with the tablebases in use. It plays >fine without them but does incredibly better with them. This goes for almost all >freeware/shareware programs. > >2. The commercial programs I have tested are Fritz, Junior, Shredder, Chess >Tiger, Gambit Tiger. With these programs they do extremely well without the >tablebases. In fact I have seen that the two Tigers play with almost no >difference at all. The commercial programs just seem to "know" the endings I >have seen. The Tigers are definately proof of this. > >3. The only commercial program that seems to "need" the tablebases is Nimzo. For >whatever reason it just plays endgames horribly without them. > >4. Of the commercial programs that _don't_ use the tablebases it is a saw off of >which is better. Goliath Blitz and Rebel seem to play endgames very well without >them. The winboard Goliath Blitz does not do well, but in the Chess Academy >interface it does very well. I have it outscoring Fritz 7 23-17 thus far in 40/2 >matches. > >5. The program that benefits the most out of all the engines that I tested is >without question Yace. The difference in play with/out them is great. I am >surprised by this. > >In short why is it that the commercial programs with the exception of Nimzo do >not seem to greatly improve with tablebases? Fritz 5.32 is a monster is does not >use them yet is just as good as most commercial counter-parts. Yet the freeware >programs increase greatly in strength with using them. > >Does a commercial program contain more knowledge in the endgame due to lack of >way to improve the opening/middlegame so the authors concentrate on the endgame >due to the amount of knowledge there is to put in there? > >This is just my findings and I am sure that others will disagree, but I think my >two cents count as well. > >Kevin.
This page took 0.01 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.