Author: Lex Loep
Date: 05:46:15 10/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 03, 2002 at 05:09:56, John Smith wrote: >On October 03, 2002 at 04:59:21, Terry Ripple wrote: > >>On October 03, 2002 at 04:27:27, John Smith wrote: >> >>>I don't mean to start a troll, and I do realize that you need hundreds of games >>>to make any significant mathematical statement as to the relative strength of >>>any particular program. That being said, I have to agree with some posts that >>>state that tiger 15 is weak. >>> >>>In my particular case, yahoo advance lounge, after approximately 100 games, I >>>find that ct15 normal to be more passive than either tiger 14 and certainly >>>gambit 2. My record is worse with respect to identical opponents then with >>>tiger 14 or gambit2. >>> >>>I was wondering if perhaps there is a bug with the downloaded upgrade which >>>somehow degrades performance compared to a CD installed program. >>> >>>Just my 2 cents. >>> >>>The one area where it has improved tremendously is in the endgame. >>--------------- >>There must be something wrong with your setup because how do you explain all the >>games that Chessfun recently presented showing Tiger 15 #1!!! >> >>Regards, >> Terry > > >Maybe she had the full upgrade; I only purchased the cheap ($29) upgrade from >Lex. Or maybe she had the full CD with opening book. Who knows. > The CD-ROM version and download version have the same program and book. Lex >My setup, btw is AMD 2100xp (1533 overclocked to 1793mhz),512 mb ram 2700, and I >set hash to 192mb; all other settings to tiger 15 normal are default. > >In other games, it seems that tiger 15 gambit aggressive is stronger than >normal. However, I havent played enough games to make any definitive statement.
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.