Author: Steve Schooler
Date: 22:56:36 08/05/99
Although my brief research makes Fritz an attractive buy, I am very intrigued by the following excerpt from the Hiarcs 7.32 features documentation: The new 32Bit version of Hiarcs does not clear its hash tables between moves which makes it fantastically suited for the automated backward game analysis in the Hiarcs7.32 user interface. In backward analysis, a program with persistent hash tables knows about the further game continuation and thus looks much deeper. And supported by position learning you can show the program the dangers of a variation which it would normally stumble into in analysis and thus force it to look for superior alternatives. Hiarcs7.32 accesses the Nalimov Tablebases in the search tree. This boosts playing strength in simple endgames dramatically. In contrast, Fritz5.32 only evaluates endgame databases at the root. Questions: 1. To experienced Hiarcs 7.32 users: is the above excerpt for real? I've never heard of "backward game analysis" before. How/when is this used? To simplify responses to my remaining questions, please ASSUME that Hiarcs 7.32 search engine has an advantage re above excerpt, and that Fritz has faster nodes/sec search engine. 2. Rather than spending (approx.) $100 to acquire both, is it possible to economically get the advantages of both under one umbrella (i.e. Fritz 5.32 with the Hiarcs 7.32 search engine as an add-on, or the REVERSE)? This question really has two parts: 2a. Can the Hiarcs 7.32 search engine (only, with no interface) be purchased for significantly less than the $48+ of the full Hiarcs 7.32 package, and then "plugged into" Fritz 5.32 as an add-on. Also included in question 2a is the REVERSE, re buying and plugging Fritz engine into Hiarcs. 2b. Will the plug-in strategy of Question 2a truly consolidate both advantages? For example, the above excerpt suggests that the Hiarcs 7.32 interface allows "automated backward game analysis", while the Fritz interface does not. I infer that plugging the Fritz engine into the Hiarcs 7.32 package will achieve my goal, while the reverse will not. IS THIS TRUE? 3. In the rec.games.chess.computers newsgroup, someone informally contrasted the two search engines (Fritz 5.32 vs Hiarcs 7.32) by calling Fritz a tactical monster, and indicating that Hiarcs more often "agrees" with the move actually chosen by the Grandmaster. Perhaps this relates to Hiarcs' "backward game analysis" feature. Intriguing, REQUEST FEEDBACK ON THIS. 4. Taking everything above with a large boulder of salt: if it is all true, then I infer that Fritz is consistently superior in analyzing a "static" position (i.e. setup a position and then say analyze). REQUEST FEEDBACK ON THIS.
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.