Author: Albert Silver
Date: 07:37:42 02/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
>On a completely other topic, how to you like Chess Assistant?
>
>I have heard great things about it, and I was planning on getting version 8. Is
>it worth it? Or should I find version 7 on ebay for cheap?
It's a great program. I can only presume that Version 8 is worth it, but as I do
not have it I cannot comment. I should add, before saying anything else, that I
used to be a part of the development team for Chess Assistant, though I like to
believe that my views are fairly objective all the same.
You won't find me saying that CA is all good, and that CB is all bad, etc. I
know both programs inside out (CA7 and CB8 in any case) and appreciate their
strengths and weaknesses thoroughly. CA gets the clear nod overall though,
though it probably depends on what your priorities are.
If using the specific engines of Fritz, Hiarcs, and Junior within the program,
it goes without saying you'll be better served with CB, but if the issue is
strength of engines then CA does the trick as it comes with Tiger 2004 (in CA8)
and supports the current king of engines: Shredder.
Engine use is undoubtedly important, but CA has some important tools that CB
does not, and that I use extensively:
1) Unparalleled Tree support: one can't say enough about this:
It can easily and quickly build an entire position tree for a 2.6 million game
base, with instant stats on the position at all times. You don't need to build a
database or small tree for a smaller one, which is what one does with CB as it
is not equipped to build large trees. Such a tree on CB would take up at least
12 GB and take between 36-48 hours to build. On CA it takes 2-3 hours, and about
1.5 GB.
This tree can then be linked to any database one is using. So if you are
entering a game of your own into a small database, it will still show the stats
from the super tree. For example, and this will explain why I didn't understand
the confusion stated:
After 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bf5 5.Ng3 Bg6 6.h4 h6 7.Nf3
e6 * the stats pane shows more or less exactly the following:
Move Q-ty % Year ELO CAP Compute Annotation
8.Ne5= 166 54% 2004 +0.00
8.h5 +=/= 128 56% 2004 +0.00
8.Bd3= 23 39% 2003 +0.00
8.Bc4 6 25% 2000 +0.04
8.c3 1 0% 1994 +0.00
8.Be3 1 0% 1996 +0.18
8.Bf4 1 100% 1997 +0.00
Other Moves
8.Be2 0 -0.04
Total 326 53%
As one can see, the most played move is 8.Ne5, the = next to it is the
Encyclopedic evaluation, has been played 166 times (in my base), has scored 54%
(for white of course as it is a white move), with the last known game from 2004
(my tree hasn't been updated since Dec 15th), no Elo average for this tree, an
equal CAP evaluation (from a tree of over 10 million positions analyzed by
engines), has no separate computer evaluation (one can run one's own engine, and
then insert it into the tree stats), and no annotations. Again, I can simply
right-click on it, and enter a text annotation of my choice.
Finally there is a section of 'Other Moves' at the bottom, which is for moves
that are from analysis (but have never been played, hence the zero games) or
moves that I myself have added to the tree for analysis whether to play or to
refute. I could follow that 8.Be2 with an entire line that would appear in the
tree, with evaluations and annotations, even though it had never actually been
played.
2) Another feature of Chess Assistant 7/8 (install the latest patch BTW), is the
almighty Classifier. The Classifiers are so powerful and flexible it is really
hard to sum up all of the things one can do with them. I'll give a couple of
examples all the same:
a) One of the things CB users are eternally condemned to do, in order to
organize detailed opening repertoires, is to build numerous smaller bases
according to the opening lines they are studying. They do this to make a base
and tree for a line such as the Caro-Kann Panov, and will put all the relevant
games into it. If they get new games, they can add them to it, etc. They do not
put all their opening analysis into a single base as it would be awkward to find
the lines. A big problem with this, is that it means tons of bases (an IM friend
of mine has well over 100 such bases), and many repeated games. The reason is
simply that some of the main positions of the Panov for example, can also be
reached by the Nimzo-Indian, the Queen's Gambit Accepted, the Scandinavian, some
Sicilian lines, etc.
In CA one can build a classifier, which is a bit like the Windows Explorer, add
a title, and drag any games one wants to the Panov 'folder'. I could then drag
those same games from the same base, to the Nimzo-Indian 'folder'. The games
aren't duplicated. When I click on the relevant folder it will instantly list
the games I wanted, but it isn't making copies of them. It is just an elaborate
system of indexing. It measn that I can have several repertoires pointing to the
same game, without having more than one copy in the base, and they will always
have access to all the games in the large base.
One can also create 'searches' for each folder. For example, if one of the
folders was for all games with the Sicilian Najdorf played by Kasparov, Anand,
Kramnik, and Topalov as White then when I added new bases, I could have the
folder search all the new bases to see if it found new games that fit that
criteria.
It goes without saying that one could organize one's opening repertoire this way
as well.
b) I could build a journal keeping track of my chess affairs and work. The
folders allow one to add large texts, with the expected Font and layout
controls, as well as games, hyperlinks, photos, multimedia, diagrams, etc. So I
have a folder with months, with subfolders with dates, tournament results,
personal analysis as well as other comments. Each folder and subfolder can have
titles as well as icons of one's choice or making.
Still, it must be said that one must be ready to invest a bit of time to learn
the ins and outs of the program to learn how to make this into a productive part
of one's chess work. You can't expect to have this richness in features and not
only guess that they exist (if you were a CB user you obviously never saw such
features before), but how to use them. But bear in mind that once you do, the
rewards are great.
3) Much as I have nothing against Playchess, I am an ICC member and CA supports
use of ICC directly from the program, and yes you can configure the engines
within it to run there automatically as well. It allows me to overview my games,
analyze them with the engines, and I can also access the new Chess PLanet server
as well.
4) Finally, the games upgrade service is unparalleled. CB's service is basically
to allow you to dowload the games from TWIC. While TWIC is very very good, don't
get me wrong, CA has a professional subscription service (6 months for free when
you buy a new CA) that provides no less than the DOUBLE the games TWIC does. Not
all games are the highest level as this includes junior events, but it includes
a number of other events missed by TWIC such as smaller Eastern European opens,
and national leagues.
Albert
>
>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.