Author: Reynolds Takata
Date: 08:33:09 12/10/98
Go up one level in this thread
>It seems to me that there are a lot of Chessmaster lovers and supporters in this >BB, or that seems to be my impression here, that all other programs are less >often talked about. There seems to be a lot of commotion about the CM engine to >be the strongest of all engines available today. My point is what good is to >have a top engine if all other features to help a chessplayer to develop into a >better player are missing. See that's what you miss, why do i need it to do database stuff and sparring when i have fritz 5 and chessbase. Every program i have doesn't need to do all of that stuff because i have other programs to fill that role. The role of chessmaster in my program is to simply play great chess, it fills that role to perfection. It is not enough to just play against the engine >itself. These missing features having being pointed out by KK, so I won't repeat >here. Go and read his review. Although CM is cheaper than other professinal >engines available, it's lack of feature makes it less desirable for a >chessplayer who wants to improve and move further in the chess arena. Why is this when you have other programs to fullfill those functions? It's about having varied opponents once you have those other criteria met, thus since o have programs to do the extras CM just needs to play. The bottom >line is you get what you pay for. I said the CM is not aggressive, it is true, >if one looks closer and investigate the playing style of the engine it resembles >a style which plays classical chess, CM likes to accumulate small advantages, it >doesn't force the its own will on the position, that is, does not go for >complications, its assessment is the type of classical school of thought, I'm sorry but you aren't going to get anyone to agree with you on this! CM is extremely violent, it along with CSTAL, and perhaps MCHESS are the 3 most agressive players. gives >more value to static features on the position rather than looking for the >dynamic possibilities that the position may present, Fritz and MCP 8 play for >complications and gives more value in its evaluation to unbalanced positions. I >find such style of play by CM boring Well boring is a subjective statement and if chessmaster plays boring to you well I'd hate to see what you call exciting "people getting two bullets in the head and their genitals sliced off with razor blades perhaps?" and do not confuse aggressive play with a >king side attack, or a combo played on board. So what if CM is a top engine >which is still subject to debate, I think that Hiarcs 7 will be a stronger >engine than CM. Enough said, my guess is that CM lovers like to watch their CM >play games against other engines rather than use an engine with features which >can help a chessplayer to improve.
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.