Author: Melvin S. Schwartz
Date: 21:45:01 06/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 1999 at 19:17:02, blass uri wrote: > >On June 13, 1999 at 14:47:15, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > ><snipped> >>>I do not have unlimited time and I prefer to test Junior against the best >>>program. >>> >>>I believe that Hiarcs7.32 is now the best commercial program because I believe >>>that Hiarcs7.32 is better than Hiarcs7 and I also know that Hiarcs7 did very >>>good results in tournaments. >>> >>For someone who has often said "show me proof" I am surprised to hear you say "I >>believe" which is quite different than "fact". Tournaments? You know that SSDF's >>testing at 40/2 between Hiarcs 7 and Fritz 5.32 was 22-18 in Fritz's favor. Now >>that is fact. I have seen another tournament of ten games where the score was >>6-4, again in favor of Fritz. Now that too is fact. I personally have no desire >>to say Fritz is better than Hiarcs 7; however, I cannot see how you can dispute >>the above results and say Hiarcs 7 is better because Mark Young's tests reveal >>that to you. That's like saying the heck with everyone else's results and let's >>just go by Mark Young's feeling or test results. > >I believe that mark young is an honest tester but it is not only because of mark >young's tests > >Hiarcs7 did better results in enrique's games(40 minutes per 40 moves on 2 >pentium400's and I have the games in this case). >You can find the results and the games in computer chess resource centre. >If you click on chess computer reports and go down to computer-computer games >you can find enrique's games. > > I have a little problem with >>that. And I like Hiarcs better! However, as you say, "show me proof". I don't >>particularly enjoy defending Fritz; I only do so out of fairness to all. I >>wouldn't be the least surprised if Hiarcs 7.32 goes to number 1 on the SSDF >>rating list; in fact, I expect that will be the case. However, until both Hiarcs >>7.32 and Fritz 5.32 square off in at least 40 games, we really are just using >>the hypothetical here, aren't we? > >Yes,It is only my impression that Hiarcs7.32 is better and I may be wrong. >I believe that the only difference between hiarcs7.32 and hiarcs7 is the fact >that hiarcs7.32 is 25% faster and can use nalimov tablebases if your computer is >fast enough but again I cannot be sure about it. Hello Uri, I have been told by Steve Lopez who writes the T-notes column for ChessBase, and is the technical support guy at Chessbase USA, that in order to get Nalimov Tablbases you need about 8 gigs of space on your harddrive and then you download it which takes something like two weeks. Good luck! 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.