Author: Melvin S. Schwartz
Date: 20:37:07 06/07/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 1999 at 20:24:59, blass uri wrote: > >On June 07, 1999 at 19:49:17, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >> >>On June 07, 1999 at 12:37:07, blass uri wrote: >> >>> >>>On June 07, 1999 at 11:16:13, Shep wrote: >>> >>>>On June 07, 1999 at 10:15:55, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >>>> >>>>>Since Hiarcs 7.32 and Fritz 5.32 are condidered to be two of the best three >>>>>prgrams available, if not the two best, wouldn't it be inteesting to run Hiarcs >>>>>in Fritz, or Fritz in Hiarcs, and have Fritz play tactical and Hiarcs play >>>>>positional positions? Of course the question then becomes, would the program >>>>>accurately know when to switch? Anybody have thoughts on this? >>>> >>>>Unfortunately, it is not very clear how Fritz differentiates between these >>>>types. I noticed that, running the Louguet suite, even most of the POS subsuite >>>>is considered "Tactical" by Fritz (IIRC only 5/14 are "positional" for Fritz). >>>> >>>>I have played some games with T:Fritz P/E:Junior (I called this combination >>>>"ClaireChess" on SCCS) and noticed that either almost the whole game was played >>>>by one engine alone or there was exactly one point where Fritz switched from one >>>>engine to the other and never switched back again. >>>> >>>>I think Chessbase will sooner or later have to make this function modular and >>>>programmable because it is still very difficult to decided which positions are >>>>tactical and which aren't. >>> >>>There is a simple solution. >>>look for the first 5 options for 1% of your time. >>>If the difference between the best move and the 5th best move is more than a >>>pawn then the position is tactical otherwise it is positional. >>> >>>You can change the numbers but the idea is clear. >>> >>>This is of course not a perfect solution but does someone has a better idea? >>> >>> >>>I do not know if Fritz5.32 is better in tactical positions. >> >>Whether they are right or wrong, I'll present my sources for saying Fritz is >>better in tactical positions. Mr. Giehring at Chessbase sent me a message, which >>I have saved, stating Fritz 5.32 is slightly better in tactical positions than >>Hiarcs 7.32. Also, in a review by Claudio Bollini, which can be read at this >>site, he shows a diagram based on a particular test done to evaluate different >>programs that I believe indicates Fritz to be better at tactics. >> >>>I read that Hiarcs7 is a good solver so it is good at tactics and I know about >>>ssdf games that Fritz5.32 won Hiarcs7 because of better endgame play and not >>>because of tactics. >> >>This is very surprising in light of the review of Hiarcs 7 where in the "endgame >>hits test" Hiarcs was excellent along with MC8. I believe he rated those two as >>tops in endgame play according to the "hits"test. >> >>>Does someone has a proof that Fritz is better than Hiarcs7 or Junior in >>>practical tactical positions? >> >>I believe you think quite highly of Junior. For that reason I am baffled by >>Junior's poor showing in SSDF testing. How do you compare Junior 5 against >>Hiarcs 7 and Fritz 5.32 in overall playing strength, and by what criteria do you >>base your conclusion? > >I know that James walker did a match between Junior5 and Fritz5.32 >(90 minutes per 40 moves) and the result was 6:6 > >I know that Junior5 lost 28.5:11.5 against Hiarcs7 but the problem is that the >games are not public. > >Junior5 did better results in public games against Hiarcs7. >I know that it won Hiarcs7 6:4 in enrique games(40 minutes per 40 moves on a >fast pentium) > >I also read that Hiarcs7.32 had problems against Junior5 in the test games >and I did not read about results like 28.5:11.5 > >Junior5 earns more speed from the fast computers relative to Fritz5.32 or >Hiarcs7 > >Here are the numbers: > >AMD K6-2 450 vs P200MMX > >Speed improvement: > >Fritz3 130% >Genius2 119% >Gandalf3 84% >McP6 117% >Rebel8 148% >Hiarcs7.01 137%=2.37 times faster >Fritz5.32 114%=2.14 times faster >Junior5 142%=2.42 times faster >Shreddr3 106% >Nimzo98 147% I know that at 40/2 with a 200MHz processor, Fritz needs 72 megs of RAM. At 40/2 with a 400 MHz processor, Fritz needs 144 megs of RAM. Without knowing more details from your posting above, it is impossible for me to come to a valid conclusion. I don't know if Junior uses Hash Tables in the same way Fritz does, but I do know Hiarcs does not. If you could provide the time control used for the above test and Fritz's allocated Hash Table usage, then I could evaluate the above with more authenticity. Unless of course, the time control and Hash Table total are both irrelevant? Mel> >Uri
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.