Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:23:39 09/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2002 at 07:16:59, Marc van Hal wrote: >On September 01, 2002 at 16:58:22, Terry Ripple wrote: > >>On September 01, 2002 at 13:19:00, Stuzzi Kadent wrote: >> >>>On September 01, 2002 at 13:10:43, robert flesher wrote: >>> >>>>[Event ""] >>>>[Site ""] >>>>[Date "2002.9.2"] >>>>[Round ""] >>>>[White "BOB"] >>>>[Black "Chessmaster"] >>>>[TimeControl "300+5"] >>>>[Result 1-0] Played on a 1.6ghz P4 >>>> >>>>1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.Bb3 Nbd7 8.f4 >>>>Nc5 9.O-O Ncxe4 10.Nxe4 Nxe4 11.f5 e5 12.Qh5 d5 13.Re1 Bc5 14.Rxe4 O-O >>>>15.Rg4 Bxd4+ 16.Kh1 e4 17.Bg5 Qd7 18.Rf1 Qb5 19.Rgf4 Bxb2 20.a4 Qa5 >>>>21.Be7 Re8 22.f6 Bxf6 23.Bxf6 gxf6 24.Rxf6 Be6 25.Rxe6 Rxe6 26.Qxf7+ Kh8 >>>>27.Qxe6 Qc3 28.Bxd5 e3 29.g3 e2 30.Qxe2 Qd4 31.Bxb7 Rg8 32.Qxa6 Rg6 >>>>33.Qb5 1-0 >>>> Hi all i just got back from holidays.:) I was happy to find that chessmaster >>>>had been released here in Canada. I am greatly impressed with this new piece of >>>>software. I have played about 50 games at 5min 5sec increments. The score is not >>>>good for me :). However! i decided to try playing some off beat, sharper lines >>>>that i have studied exstensively. This is the Lipinsky attack. I was not shocked >>>>that Chessmaster played into this line, however is WAS shocked to see it play >>>>all the BAD or dubious moves. This could be a reason why Chessmaster still does >>>>not place as well as other commercials. In engine strength it is clearly as >>>>strong, or close to the top engines, but a book with Holes? CAN! and WILL! be >>>>preyed upon by other engines. Overall i love this software and it was worth the >>>>50bucks i paid for it. Cheers~! >>> >>>Ed Schroeder says he gave up on computer tournaments because they depend now so >>>heavily on exploiting knowledge of the opponents' opening books. >>>BUT- I am concerned if a program has a small or poor book. How many moves or >>>positions are claimed for this one? >>------------------------------- >>Wouldn't it be most interesting to see the results if they would start having >>tournaments where a Chess program couldn't use an opening book, but instead >>would have to rely on itself to find the best moves! This way a programmer would >>be forced to try and improve their engine in the area of one of their most >>vulnerable weakness. (the Opening) >> >>Regards, >> Terry > >This could be good but for now chessprograms are not good enough in openings >play to do so >Remember that 1d4.d5 2.c4 will not be played because it thinks it looses >material. No 1.d4 d5 2.c4 does not lose material so it can be played. White can get the pawn back by e3 or Qa4+ so programs may play 2.c4. Uri
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.