Author: William Penn
Date: 07:39:47 01/28/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2006 at 17:50:38, Ryan B. wrote: >I never saw the "Rybka sucks for analysis" thread but with the way people are so >defensive of Rybka I can see why it would make some noise. I will say that >although it should have been worded differently Rybka is a better chess playing >engine than analyzing tool and I expect that not to change. My reason for >believing this is that the end of Rybka's PV is cropped off to hide the ugly >output from the hidden tactical search. This does not mean that Rybka can not >be useful for analyzing though. I think a good case could be made that Rybka is >weak in the area of King safety also. In the end, it you don't like it don't >use it I guess. That pretty much describes my position too. The Rybka betas are not satisfactory for my long analyses so I have switched to Fruit 2.2.1. I also find Rybka has weakness in situations involving a direct king attack and lots of checks, but Fruit works fine. I'll take another careful look at Rybka after release of the first non-beta version. Am I going to take the time to contruct perfect scientific proofs and examples for my opinions in those areas. No! I don't have the time, also I operate mostly on instinct. If others want to express these sorts of opinions as "Rybka sucks", that's OK with me, and I believe it should be allowed. I am open to all ideas and methods of expression. This forum is a mixture of upper class and lower class, educated and non-educated, intelligent and not so smart, so there is room for a lot of variance. 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.