Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 09:19:17 02/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2004 at 12:05:50, Tansel Turgut wrote: >I play correspondence chess.I have some experience with different engines, and I >like changing engines according to the type of the position. > >I would appreciate your input also: > >Which engines do you think are strongest in these types of positions: > >1)Wide open positions (mobile pawn center) >2)King side attacks >3)Defense (King)when being attacked >4)Fixed (central) pawn formations >5)Compensation after long term pawn sacrifices >6)Compensation after exchange sacrifices >7)Opening novelties >8)endgames >9)using 2 bishops advantage >10) middle game plans >11) transition from the opening to the middle game >12) transition from the middle game to the ending > >Your recommendations (at least in some of the above-doesn't have to be all) are >apprecited! Use ALL of the top engines for each position and then try to decide for yourself which move to play, based on the different opinions presented and on the basis of your own "best judgement." Correspondence chess is no fun if you are not personally involved in the process, I'm sure you'll agree. How much should one use chess-playing programs in correspondence chess? My perception is "everybody is doing it" so I conclude "if you don't do it too you will lose too many games." Not everybody feels that way. Anyway, if you keep on letting the engines make suggestions, you should eventually arrive at the correct answer yourself. I doubt that anybody at CCC will be able to give you a definitive answer to your question. All programmers are vain. They all think their brainchild can find the right move in all types of positions. : ) Bob D.
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.