Author: Mark Ryan
Date: 18:12:40 04/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2004 at 18:15:53, Stephen Ham wrote: >On April 19, 2004 at 16:17:37, Mark Ryan wrote: > >>Hi Stephen and others: >> >>Which chess engines are most likely to be used by correspondence chess players? >>Which engines are used to check for tactical shots, which for positional play, >>which for the endgame, which for opening theory? > >Hi Mark, > [snip] >Mark, you asked about using an engine for opening theory. I'm not sure what you >mean. Do you mean to say that one uses the engine to test book lines? If so, >then I'd again speculate that engine use varies depending upon the nature of the >position being tested. I've done this myself. I play the Dragon Sicilian as >Black, but I don't think I'm a top-notch tactician. So I sometimes test my >"TN's" against Shredder 8, just to see if there's any merit to my ideas. But >while I like its calculating power in sharp positions, I never trust its >evaluation. I always have to evaluate the position myself. > [snip] >All the best, >Stephen Actually I was thinking as follows: A chess player can study the "Encyclopedia of Chess Openings", or "Modern Chess Openings" (MCO), or "Boris Badenuf's Sneaky Opening Traps". Most chess engines have a unique opening book. Basically I was wondering if any correspondence players find any chess engine's opening book useful as a reference, in the same way that MCO might be useful. Mark
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.