Author: Chessfun
Date: 13:15:43 01/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2004 at 02:03:04, Thorsten Czub wrote: >when i first played with Hiarcs9 from the CD version i liked the program much. >but with later played games, i came to the conclusion that there is something >wrong with the setting. > >i tried with different setting and played on the playchess.com server and >wondered why the other computers with Shredder8 (or 7.04), (Deep)Fritz8 or 7 and >and and had so many problems to beat my slow notebook that only has an AMD XP-M >2400+ (which is 1800 real mhz). > > >TC style: >Therefore i began with changing the setting. On of my first efforts was to >change into agg+hyp. IMO this was better, but from the games i was able to see >that hiarcs wouldhave needed to change the king-safety terms when using this >style because very often it played TOO RISKY without looking enough for the own >king. The opponents sometimes came to a counter-attack. Nevertheless the games >were really exiting and i knew i was on the right track, changing the default >into something better. > >TC01: >The second effort was to find out by changing into def+hyp. To my own surprise >this seemed to work. Even in the setting defensive, hiarcs still played good >king attacks and very active. >But i was not confident with the search. IMO hiarcs gave often away good >positions. by changing the style it was important to change the search too. >Therefore i tried the following... Where are these 30 games?. >TC02: >This was the effort to make the search work better to the changed styling. >I let hypermodern ON because this seems to make hiarcs play better. I also let >defensive ON because hiarcs plays IMO active enough even when playing defensive. >I put combinations ON to let hiarcs play tactically better. I set the selective >peak back to 5 (from 7) to make hiarcs9 play more brute-force. IMO this causes >less blunder. I increased the treaddepth into 5. > >here are the games (all games :-))), i played 3'+2" because this helps the >programs to play a chess that is IMO higher quality. Both used their original >books. Both got 128 MB for hash. > >I am still not confident with the setting. IMO there is still something "wrong" >but i think it plays better than the default setting. These games which ended up in a tie are not the settings you claimed made Hiarcs better than Shredder 8. Why didn't you play and post the 30 using the settings you claimed were better.? Sarah.
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.