Author: Dan Kiski
Date: 06:25:44 12/11/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 11, 1998 at 09:22:25, Harald Faber wrote: >On December 11, 1998 at 09:01:59, Dan Kiski wrote: > >>>>The only difference between the Cm6555 setting and the ones of the CM-Faber one >>>>is that CM6555 uses the CM6000 opening book and the CM-faber one uses the Mentor >>>>book. Apart from that they are the same in every way. >> >> >>Therefore the cm6000 book has so far performed better than the mentor.obk since >>that is the only difference between the two settings. That is interesting since >>mentor.obk is deeper than cm6000.obk, i guess cm6000.obk is mostly mainlines >>while mentor.obk plays other not so viable lines?. > >But this doesn't explain it clearly. The Nunn test is constructed so that the >programs/players start at these positions WITHOUT further use of opening books >so it should make no difference if you "use" mentor or cm6k.obk because they >should be disabled. The reason for this discrepancy CAN be that they were not >disabled. > I agree as far as the nunn test goes, but my understanding is that he is not using the nunn test but is using the opening books as stated, one using cm6k.obk and the other using mentor.obk. >>>So in the Nunn test yo should get almost the same results or do you play the >>>Nunn positions still with book use? AFAIK that is not the aim of that test.
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.