Author: Graham Laight
Date: 02:35:35 11/10/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 09, 1998 at 12:15:08, odell hall wrote: > >On November 09, 1998 at 04:28:18, Graham Laight wrote: > >>Again - it is fine to criticise the play of Hiarcs, but if you accuse it of >>having a rating which is too high, it is incumbent on you to explain how its >>rating could have become so high in the first place. > > >I cannot explain the high rating of hiarcs6 other than to say that it's rating >is exclusively based on games against computers only. I wonder if it's rating >would be so high in games against humans? I doubt it very seriously if it cannot >beat a 1882 player consistently how is it going to handle international master >and grandmasters? When I first got hiarcs6 I was in love with the programming >praising it's human play, until I started seeing all the holes in it's game!! You seem to be saying that the SSDF ratings are not realistic. If so, you have to overcome the arguments on the SSDF web site (http://home3.swipnet.se/~w-36794/ssdf/) that their ratings are realistic. Speaking for myself, I have not bought Hiarcs since version 2.1, which I used to run on a 10 MHz 286. I could never beat it unless I ran it on "aggressive mode". This not only made it play a truly beautiful style of chess, but made it beatable for me.
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.