Author: Peter Skinner
Date: 15:23:33 11/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On November 01, 2004 at 15:47:58, Mark R. Anderson wrote: >Peter, > >I agree. I too have found that at fast time controls, Hiarcs is a monster, but >it falls off quite a bit at slower controls. However, I think all in all, >Hiarcs is a very fine engine with very good positional understanding and also >the ability to sense weaknesses around the king and go after them. A fun engine >to play against or watch play, one with an "enterprising" sytle. One of my very >favorites. > >Lately, I have been trying tactical suites against some of my engines. Hiarcs >did very, very well, as I expected. Also, Ruffian 2.1 did very well too, as did >Pro Deo 1.0. Those didn't surprise me either. In one test I did (210 test >positions), the engine that came out on top was Tao 5.6 (UCI version)! That >really surprised me. Do you find Tao to be a tactical monster too? I knew that >Hiarcs, Ruffian and Pro Deo were, but Tao??? > >Mark Anderson Yes Tao is a great engine. I have seen some great attacks from it on FICS. I must say however, and I didn't mention it in my original post that I don't use the default book. The book I use was made over the last few years. It was originally based on the gm2600.pgn, but then I switched to a large database I compiled myself. It is a very good book, and I edit it almost on a daily basis. Peter
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.