Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: What contrbution is it, besides statistics?

Author: Kurt Utzinger

Date: 04:04:26 12/31/04

Go up one level in this thread


On December 31, 2004 at 06:58:23, stuart taylor wrote:

>On December 31, 2004 at 00:56:53, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>
>>On December 30, 2004 at 20:05:55, stuart taylor wrote:
>>
>>>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?
>>
>>
>>      Hi Stuart
>>      You are right: results and statistics are one thing, the
>>      way how engines play another thing. Well, with Junior9
>>      you have a fine engine that is in particular very very
>>      strong in dynamic positions. Junior9 seems to know much
>>      about compensation and the games are quite often amazing:
>>      Junior9 sees some advantage other engines can't evaluate
>>      correctly and quite often his opponents are ambushed and
>>      their evaluation suck at once from a very positive to a
>>      negative score. You will simply have great fun with Junior9
>>      I can promise you. It's a must to have engine -:)
>>      Kurt [http://www.utzingerk.com]
>
>If I want only ONE engine for this display of chess wisdom, would I take Hiarcs
>9, or Junior 9?
>I suppose it's hard to answer this with all programmers watching what you (or
>anyone) is saying. But so are some of the top consumers.
>S.Taylor

      Hi Stuart
      In that case I can't help you. I could never decide between
      Hiarc9 (top for fast analysis) and Junior9 (top for dynamic
      positions). It's simply impossible to compare these two
      engines.
      Kurt



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.