Author: enrico carrisco
Date: 15:20:12 12/26/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 2005 at 17:58:47, Mike van Rooyen wrote: >On December 26, 2005 at 16:01:56, Peter Eizenhammer wrote: > >>On December 26, 2005 at 13:11:56, Mike van Rooyen wrote: >> >>>Looking at the Hiarcs 10 games posted here,especially the Nunn Test games vs >>>Fritz 9 I am dissapointed! Many talk about Hiarcs's human style however I am not >>>convinced. Fritz 9 understands most positions much better than Hiarcs.The close >>>result of the Nunn matches is more due to its tactical ability rather than its >>>positional understanding.It plays many computer-like moves whereas Fritz 9 plays >>>very human-like moves. >>>What do you think? >>>Mike >> >>hello Mike, >> >>I dont have Hiarcs 10 yet, but for Fritz9 I would agree that it is >>very strong in positional understanding and that its game play looks very "human >>like". >>So your observation may be blamed on the strength of Fritz more than on a >>weakness of Hiarcs. >> >>Peter >Thanks for your observations! >Play through games between the two and you will see what I mean. >In the Nunn test Hiarcs often does not have a clue compared to Fritz9. http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?473562 By your claims, I guess they are both clueless -- based on the final score. -elc.
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.