Author: Mark R. Anderson
Date: 14:15:12 12/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 01, 2004 at 15:53:18, steen suurballe wrote: >Glad you like the intentional made playing style :-) Steen, I agree 100 percent with Sally. Gandalf 6 is *wonderful* to play against ... it makes one feel like you're playing with a very aggressively-minded GM. As for all of these people who are making a fuss about the claimed 100 point rating increase not being "proven" ... they just don't get it. Clearly, Gandalf is MUCH stronger than 5 or 4.32, and is very competitive with leading engines. My copy of Gandalf 6 has defeated Hiarcs 9, Fritz 8, Tiger 15, and Deep Sjeng in matches at 5 and 10 minutes per game, and lost narrowly to List 5.12 and Ruffian. Not bad! Not only watching the games, but also playing Gandalf 6, it's obvious that this one is a doberman and not a lap poodle! It wants to go for your throat. Gandalf spots many aggressive attacking moves that the top engines have a hard time finding. It also seems to understand compensation for sacrificed material and also loves unbalanced positions (where attacks are "in the air") with possibilities for both sides. Don't we all? So what if it can't beat Shredder 8? Who can? Give me Gandalf to play against any day ... Shredder is a great engine, but IMHO is boring by comparison and it's PV evaluations are sometimes complete hooey. These people who are complaining about Gandalf not yet proving it's "100 point increase" should try playing Gandalf *themselves* on any ghz-class modern P4/AMD machines and the engine will drub them mercilessly. If this engine is enabled with its tournament book and tablebases, given lots of hashtable space and put on a fast machine, I don't think *anyone* who posts at this forum can beat it once ... ever. (Of course this can no doubt also be said of Hiarcs, Fritz, Shredder, Junior, etc) Sorry about my rant, but this is a very high quality engine with lots of good features, and I think people should appreciate it's qualities and quit whining and finger pointing. Not every engine can be #1. This engine works in all major GUIs (ChessBase, Chess Partner, Arena, WinBoard), has a Tal-like killer style, and is very good positionally and plays much like a very, very good (and aggressive) human. So what more do they want? So what if it's "only" 2750 instead of 2800? We will never beat it at *either* of these 2 levels, and already have to "dumb" it down to give it a chance. The very die-hard aggressiveness of Gandalf probably costs it some games (and rating points) against the likes of Shredder, but so what? This style is the very reason that we should enjoy it! Not only is it great to play against, but I have found it wonderful to be an analysis partner in complex, tactical, attacking positions. One final point ... who is the player that the majority of people always say is their favorite? Karpov? No. Petrosian? No. Capablanca? No. Portisch or Reshevsky? No. Botvinnik? No. These are all talented and worthy players, but most people's big favorite is always Mikhail Tal. (If you don't believe me ... ask at a big chess club.) So, why would you want another Shredder (aka Karpov)? Geez ... people should appreciate what you've done, or get a life. Mark Anderson
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.