Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 06:52:47 12/30/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 2002 at 02:03:57, Sandro Necchi wrote: >On December 29, 2002 at 14:07:14, Lieven Clarisse wrote: > >>I disagree, testing without an opening book is a good test for chess engines! >> >>lieven. > >Hi, > >This is totally wrong. >Sorry, but the program has been developed considering the use of a massive book, >which is an important part of the program. So it is like to use the program >without legs... And if you want to know how a program w/o legs performs, it's best to... test the programs w/o legs. ;) I agree that in order to get the best performance of the engine it's best to use the book too, since - as you point out correctly - the engine was developed/tuned with this particular book in mind. Not everyone who owns chess engines, plays engine-engine matches though. ;) For someone who uses an engine to analyze her games, this best performance of the engine is not that important. In fact, if the particular player for example only plays the Sicilian defense, she should test the engines with a book, which contains only the Sicilian defense, in order to find out which engine is the best to analyze _her_ games... (whether the program plays brilliantly in the accepted queen-pawn gambit is not important to her) Sargon
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.