Author: Robert Pawlak
Date: 19:23:16 01/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2004 at 18:58:52, Robin Smith wrote: >On January 01, 2004 at 17:21:35, Alan Grotier wrote: > >> >> Does a chess player rated around 1500 and playing mostly against chess >>engines,need a chessbase "X" or a Chess Assistant "X" etc to obtain the variety >>of analysis features that seem to be offered by these databases or >>does a standard chess engine such as Fritz 8 offer the same analysis features? >> >> I will not be competing seriously and just need to examine my own mostly lost >>games.But want the best analysis features available at this time. >> >> Alain > >Hi Alain, > >For analysis such as you mention I think any one of the Chessbase programs, >Fritz, Junior, Shredder, Hiarcs etc. should work very well. The databases don't >have the same level of analysis features and cost more. > >Robin Robin, What you have said is simply not true. The analysis features of CA go far beyond what is offered by Fritz and company. For instance, multiple positions can be aanalyzed by an engine while other work is being conducted in the database. The tree integration, and annotation features are also superior (for instance, annotating a position of move in the tree with text, or being able to easily designat arbitary trees to follow a specific game, open different trees at once). I could go on in this vein, but you get my drift. So to answer Alan's question, the analysis capabilities are better (at least in CA). The main thing that CB buys him (over Fritz) is the ease of working with multiple games and DBs at once. As to whether Alan needs such a program is another question entirely. It all depends on his motivation level. Programs like Fritz are really sufficient for most people. But for those that are serious about game analysis, a database offers many advantages like those enumerated above, to whit: 1. The ability to easily work with many databases and games at once (for example, easily examine a master game that contains ideas that are relevant to the game you are analyzing). 2. Organizing said games into multiple databases (you want to keep your reference DB free of your own games, unless you are a titled player). 3. Searches across multiple databases at once. 4. Working with multiple trees at once - it can be valuable to look at tree statistics for your own games, and those of your reference database. 5. With CA, all open databases, games, etc are remembered each time the program is closed, so you can easily pick up where you left off. The above is a very partial list, and just summarizes some of the things that come to mind. Fritz (and the like) simply don't work the way one naturally would. For instance, if you were analyzing a game without a comp, you'd consult reference books, etc. But you probably wouldn't close each book and put it back on the shelf after you consulted it one time. This is what you do in Fritz, where you can have only _one_ game and _one_ database open at a time. It's fine for casual use, but not for serious study. Yes, this is a mtter of convenience - it depends on what your time is worth. My purpose is not to sell or tell Alan to buy (or not buy) a database. It is simply to give him the facts. Bob (www.chessassistance.com, www.chessreviews.com)
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.