Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CM6000: just because is strong it dfoes not means is for pros

Author: Micheal Cummings

Date: 06:27:32 12/05/98

Go up one level in this thread



On December 05, 1998 at 09:14:26, Fernando Villegas wrote:

>On December 04, 1998 at 14:25:43, Reynolds Takata wrote:
>
>>On December 04, 1998 at 10:12:03, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>>
>>>Incredible how long discussion are produced because a lack of previous
>>>definitions of terms, as usual. A very long thread begun about if CM6000 should
>>>or should not be considered as a serious program just because nobody bothered to
>>>say that serious programs does not coincide with just strong programs. Strenght
>>>is now a comodity. You can get strong program even in freeware sections. Do I
>>>exagerate if i say most of them defeat most of us anyway? So the point is how
>>>good and workable the database is. It's good to learn openings?  Makes things
>>>easier to grasp your weaknesses? Ches programas are now strong in the same sense
>>>as all motorcars have wheels. The issue is: what about the rest and the rest
>>>here is the surroundings, even the GUI. I dare to say that once database
>>>facilities reach a point of strenght as engines has, GUi will be the next
>>>decisive point to evaluate.
>>>fernando
>>
>>
>>  I'm quite sorry you are incorrect( at least your heading).  The thing is that
>>Chessmaster does not have all of the features of fritz, in fact no one has the
>>features of fritz/J5.  However strong players like to have the ability to play
>>against varied styles of opponents, and to be able to get oppinions by various
>>different programs, thus indeed CM can have a role in strong players/pro arsenal
>>of training tools.  Especially because CM isn't just a strong player as you want
>>to claim, but indeed it's in the top 5, plus it's style is fairly unique.  If
>>you want to claim that it's Gui isn't clear well that's opinion I like the way i
>>have set up it's GUI second only to fritz/J5, and i have every program in the
>>ssdf top 10.  Further though it is yet to be seen, if a program came out and was
>>clearly stronger than the rest of the programs, i don't care if it had
>>absolutely zero features, except playing.  It would have a role.  This is not
>>saying the CM is the strongest program, though it very well could be, there is
>>in fact a strong arguement to be made for it, it is probably the winner of KKII,
>>it's won almost all of the 40/2 tournaments on the shep testing page, the (king
>>3.0)also recently just won a very strong tournament this week.  Further there is
>>a pretty solid stream of Chessmaster victories being posted here.
>>
>>Reynolds Takata
>>USCF Life Master
>>Fide Master
>>25 years of chess experience
>>Owner of all Programs in the SSDF top 10(excepting Gandalf 3) :)
>
>
>Dear Reybnolds:
>In fact my post is not headed to discuss if CM600 is  or  it is not this or
>that. Personally I think it is one of the three strongest programs and I like
>its GUI. My point is less about CM than about how to define the field of
>professional software. I propose to define it like the software capable of
>giving to the most demanding GM player all what he needs to prepare for a
>tournament. If that definition is correct, maybe juts one program or two could
>be considered as such. Probably we need an alternative dcefinition for non
>professional programs as much there is a great lag between CM6 or Junior and a
>progranm like, let us say, Battle chess. This last clearly is mass market, but
>then what is CM6k? Non professional but also non mass market. A third definition
>is needed. What abourt serious player class'
>fernando

Why serious, if the top five or six programs on SSDF are considered Grandmaster
class, then why not classify it as just that. I mean it is Grandmaster strength
is it not.

Who is to say that a GM would not use CM6K to prepare to matches. I read that
alot of GM use chessbase and other database programs. Plus software like Fritz
and Rebel to prepare. So why not chessmaster. I doubt that a GM would stick to
just one software program.

I think alot of what people write is just bias towards one program or the other.
I know I started out saying CM6K was crap, I was a Rebel 9 and 10 man. I still
am but I am now on CM6K side as well now, after setting up to the way I like and
playing it.



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.