Author: stuart taylor
Date: 17:05:55 12/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
I'm always interested in two things. 1).What the results are statistically, and 2). What does this machine contribute by the way it plays, which another does not? It's not enough if it has nice ideas which lose because they are unsound. But I'm talking about real strong play which only loses because of certain little problems, but the concepts being great. Juniors recent results are great enough that, if they were attained with great attacking play, then I would feel that if it was the same, but with LESS attacking play, then it would have higher results than Shredder and Hiarcs. i.e. the attacking play caused a little risk which calmer great programs can exploit. But what about Hiarcs 9? Maybe THAT is more qualitative than Junior 9? Maybe not! So what do I get from playing through Junior 9 games, which I gedt less of, from others?
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.