Author: Marcus Kaestner
Date: 02:22:49 12/08/98
Go up one level in this thread
Some guys here are really stupid. First of all the point is not which program is best. The point is which combination (program/hardware/user)is best, because every operator uses his own books, his own styles and his own time-management which depends on the program you have to beat. And so it doesn´t matter on which hardware you play. And the hardware is the less point which makes a participant a winner. Sure, with better hardware you have better chances, but notice that Genius on P60 earned 4 Points and Genius on PII-468 earned only 2.5 points. Notice that Shredder 3 on P200 earned 4 points and on K6-350 earned oonly 2.5 points. Notice that Gandalf on P200 earned also more points than Gandalf on PII-350 and so on. Notice also that Genius 5 on P60 beats Nimzo 99 made remis against Fritz 5.32 and Junior (all on K6-400)!! Where is the improvement? Also I am a hardware-freak (I had the fastest machine on this tournament) I have to realize that the importance of the hardware is going to zero on a 7 round tournament because other factors (good books, good settings, luck, and so on) are much much more important. The second point is we made a team score. Normally one team depends on a fast and a slow computer, so that the teams are as equal as possible to make a fair contest. Ok, the Rebel-team had an hardware-advantage but Rebel would have won also on slower hardware. The Nimzo-team (my team) had with distance the best hardware, probably the best books, but did it help? No, because bad circumstances and bugs pushed me back. That is important! To have a homogen combination and a stable hardware/program without bugs and hardware-errors! The third point is that I cannot hear any longer the comments of "self-made-experts" which never in their life had participate on a real tournament. There is much diffrence to a home-tournament where you have all the time, no stress, no pressure. Those people gave big comments but having no experience. In germany we say: blind persons are talking about seeing!!! The last point is that it is possible to see how good a program plays, also when it plays on weak machines. You see the style of his playing, you see the plans he discovers and you see the blunders. The first two points have nothing to do with hardware and under all aspects the Rebel 10 program was far far away the best chess player. For example: The Nimzo-team made the 4th place, but the playing style was terrible. Nearly every win of Nimzo99 was out of a lost game because the oppenent blundered. Very different Rebel 10. He never came in a lost game. Different also Fritz. He came in lost games but had luck. And if you are following the other games you will see that also CM6000, Zarkov, Shredder 3 and Gandalf have not enough power to reach Rebel or Virtual II. Also Nimzo 99 and Junior (on the two fastest machines) where very disapponting in this tournament. But if there are persons who "can only laugh" about that tournaments, they can do - nobody holds them back, but they have to notice that they are not very intelligent. Marcus Kästner
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.