Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 17:17:12 06/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 2005 at 16:55:53, Dann Corbit wrote: >On June 16, 2005 at 03:47:53, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>I dont buy it. >>The engines had to play all kind of weird stuff. >>For example Shredder had to play the positions after 1.d4 b5 2.e4 a6 or 1.e4 b6 >>2.d4 e6 with black and several times 1.b4 and 1.g4 with white. > >Shredder used its own book and learning files (or possibly it was pure >learning?). Shredder 9 UCI was used with all defaults. Games were played under >Arena. I don`t have the UCI version of Shredder 9 but I thought Shredder can not use it`s own book under Arena. I honestly don`t think the new Shredder book plays lines like 1.d4 e5? or 1.d4 b6 2.e4 b5? with black. > >>Fruit-massy-intel-profile even had to play one time 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5? and was >>lost in a few moves. >>Your test is flawed. > >Amazing fruit did so well with a bad book. Imagine what could be accomplished >with a good one. I doubt it`s performance would be only 25 points worse than Shredders performance if both had used a good one. Michael
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.