Author: Paulo Soares
Date: 14:03:44 07/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 1999 at 12:39:26, Chuck wrote: (snip) >Yes, you are mostly right. I wouldn't say Fritz is a bad choice, I just don't >think it's the best choice for a general user. 1) Their primary design goals are >for winning major comp-comp matchups and 2) if you want to improve or evaluate >the openings you play, you want super-deep analysis and as much knowledge as >possible..Hiarcs is probably a better choice (though I would always recommend >using at least 2 programs). The Chessbase interfaces are very good for this >because they'll give you the top several lines and evaluations at once. > >But my main point was the hardware issue. All programs should expect to play >games on equal hardware, and if this is the case, no one should complain. Rebel >doesn't specify that you should boot to DOS to run it in comp-comp games, even >though this would surely speed it up about 10%. Chuck, I don't know if one of the objectives of Chessbase is to win the games compxcomp, this seems to me be a theory defended for Uri. You can make a super-deep analysis using Fritz, Rebel, Nimzo, Schreder, Hiarcs, Mchess, Genius, Crafty, Comet, etc,etc,etc, but, in my opinion, to improve those analyses that goes to depend more on you that the knowledge of any of those programs. I believe that, when speaks in analyses, the participation of he/she has that to be effective, it's not enough only trust the programs. I do not know if Ed speaks about DOS or not, what I know is that Ed recommends Rebel10.0c to play compxcomp and Rebel10.0b for other games. I find that it is obligation of the programmer to explain which the best configurations, as much for compxcomp, compxhuman, tests, etc. In that the support says respect, Rebel is best, without comparison. Paulo Soares
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.