Author: William Penn
Date: 12:56:48 02/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2005 at 15:48:27, George C Williams wrote: >On February 16, 2005 at 15:39:07, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >>On February 16, 2005 at 15:26:40, Mike van Rooyen wrote: >> >>>Very very strong.A definite improvement.However,Shredder is sometimes very >>>optimistic in its evaluation.It has lost quite a few +3 positions in my tests. >>>I'm therefore reluctant to trust its evaluations for analysis. >>>Mike >> >> >> Shredder 9 Test (40'/40) 5moves.ctg is running, >> now 3 matches and 150 games played, to be continued >> http://www.utzingerk.com/shredder9_test.htm >> Kurt > > > So how does your reply answer his observations about shredder's analysis >problem, i don't get it? I think it's appropriate, and interesting. We're all hungry for such tests. Also, the subject is "...first impressions" so almost anything is relevant. My only observation is that the UCI engine seems to run a bit faster in the Classic GUI, so the results might be slightly better if that GUI were used. But of course they're good enough already...! WP
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.