Author: David H. McClain
Date: 12:52:11 08/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 16, 2005 at 13:45:29, Thorsten Czub wrote: >and the best thing is: > >it had a single-cpu machine, no tablebases and shredder is normally very good in >endgame. > >fruit is a strange program. at least for me. it fails in the typical test-suites >when it comes to sac a piece or a pawn. > >but it plays good chess. > >shredder has much more knowledge, but fruit is a dangerous opponent. > >the first people shout that the bean-counters strike back. >IMO this is to early to shout. > >fruit is different. that is what counts. in times where chess programs are used >to beat each other , fruit came from nowhere and is different. > >thats enough. > >a DIFFERENT programm cannot be outsearched or outcomputed. >you cannot guess what it will do. > >in older times of computerchess we had this situation more often because >programs were different , there was a bigger variety of ideas and programs. > >with the evolution of programs, suddenly there are only a few almost equal >programs, fighting against each other. but they have adopted each other and are >very similar. > >if we get more different aproaches to computerchess, the game suddenly is open >again for a wonder. Thorsten, What you stated is exactly why it is so much more enjoyable playing against Fruit and many of the other "amateur" programs, win or lose. You just don't know what they are going to do. I would rather play against Fruit, Toga, and the other amateurs any day, they are much more refreshing! DHM
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.