Author: Micheal Cummings
Date: 04:45:36 12/11/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 11, 1998 at 07:40:28, Harald Faber wrote: >On December 11, 1998 at 07:31:55, Micheal Cummings wrote: > >>Fine that it has good database and all the bells and whistles you want, that >>CM6K does not have. >>But deep down when you use it to play chess and analyse games, you will think >>from all that you read on CCC about CM6K being the strong and maybe the >>strongest, you will think to yourself, well this is great, I have all the best >>features I want in a program, but I do not have the best engine to go along with >>it.That is sitting in a cheap CM6K program. And those people are going to hate >>that. > >IMHO Fritz/Junior has the best analysis features beside Rebel. For blundercheck >and database analysis get one of them or even both. If you STUDY chess, analyze >a little longer some positions or need a good hint for your correspondence game, >then use MCP, Hiarcs or the King. > >>I want a strong and the best engine. I really doubt that the serious player >>would use all database functions in everyone of the many programs they have. > >Not the database functions but the analysis functions. >And concerning strength, I repeat myself: all engines have the same strength. >You would see that if you play >500 games each between the TOP10 programs (incl. >the King of course). >They only differ in style. You maybe right but it was not the point of this post, I suppose I should have just wrote instead of trying to make points in my opinion that; The reason why some people hate CM6K is that they do not want to hear that a Cheap program maybe stronger than their expensive one.
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.