Author: Terry Presgrove
Date: 14:37:41 02/07/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 1999 at 10:09:19, Micheal Cummings wrote: >Having started and experiment between CM6K and Rebel 10 which I have included >all of the CM6K opening to my knowledge into the rebel 10 opening book, I wonder >how Rebel or any other chess engine would perform using opening moves that are >not popular. > >I know that CM6K uses some weird and wonderful ones, which is why I am playing >12 games with it ans Rebel 10. >Since I have heard that Rebel 10 works well with its original opening book, I am >seeing how well it works without it. I would think that a truely strong chess >engine would be able to play more unusual openings to a capable level. > >I am wondering if anyone else has tried this. And I am more particular with the >less used openings, or even more popular ones which are used but a program does >not have in its opening book. >Since part of the chessmaster opening books for different personalities include >these kinds of openings which many other programs do not. I find it most >enjoyable to watch and see how thing develope. > >As in my first game I posted, in which Rebel 10 used a move which it does not >have in its opening book, which someone picked up on :) And thus went on to lose >the game. This by far does not show me anything, but I hope in coming games it >will. > >And as also pointed out by a fellow memberr when I played this game, gives me >the impression that Rebel 10 without its own original opening books leave its >engine lacking. As he stated this was not fair on Rebel 10 when I explained this >is what I was doing. So it has made me wonder more. It seems to me that a better test (with your previous implied intentions) of engines would be to play the two engines without opening books period. To publish any results with either programs openings altered leaves an opening for critisism. I would think that it would be very difficult to set up a match even switching (playing the next round using rebel book for cm6000) where the general consensus would be that the test results had validity. Programs obviously have their favorite openings that best utilize their playing strength and to change that perameter may change the playing strength of the program considerably. I know for a fact playing crafty on ICC for more than a year now that there are many openings that crafty simply does not play well! TP > >I would like to hear from anyone knowing mroe on this matter. > >regards > >Micheal
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.