Author: Laurence Chen
Date: 12:10:52 09/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 21, 1999 at 15:00:14, odell hall wrote:
>Hi
>
> Has anyone noticed the often bizarre and irresponsible play of Hiarcs7.32?
>It is hard to believe this program is so celebrated here at CCC, the program has
>some obvious flaws that I think any Astute Human master could easily exploit.
>Last night I played it on my AMD k6-2 350 40mb, at 40\1hr, and nearly won, after
>the game I analyzed with fritz5.32, it pointed out atleast five missed wins on
>my part. Some may some, "well what are you talking about you lost didn't you"?,
>True but the point that I am making is that a player of my level should never of
>had hiarcs in such a position (uscf 1804). Analyzing the game with junior,
>fritz, and chessmaster they all made superior moves than hiarcs, and avoiding
>the trouble. If I were a computer chess operator on icc i would not feel
>comfortable playing hiarcs7.32 against titled players in anything over game\30.
>Don't get me wrong I am not basing my accessment on just this one game, but
>many. I think the biggest problem with hiarcs7 is the queenside Castling bug?
>Here is the Game, to illustrate what I am talking about.
>
>
>Event "Match game4"]
>[Site "?"]
>[Date "????.??.??"]
>[Round "?"]
>[White "Hiarcs7.32"]
>[Black "O.hall"]
>[Result "1-0"]
>[ECO "E61"]
>[WhiteElo "2595"]
>[BlackElo "1805"]
>[Annotator "ohall"
>[PlyCount "69"]
>
>{39936kB, super.ctg. PentiumII
>} 1. d4 {0} 1... Nf6 {15} 2. c4 {0} 2... g6 {7}
>3. g3 {0} 3... Bg7 {8} 4. Bg2 {0} 4... O-O {10} 5. Nc3 {0} 5... c6 {9} 6. Qb3 {
>0.58/9 68} 6... d6 {77} 7. Nf3 {0.56/9 20} 7... Nbd7 {41} 8. Bg5 {0.49/9 131}
>8... h6 {26} 9. Bd2 {0.49/9 80} 9... e5 {60} 10. dxe5 {0.42/9 71} 10... Nxe5 {
>73} 11. Nxe5 {0.36/9 59} 11... dxe5 {28} 12. O-O-O {0.34/9 74} 12... Qc7 {40}
>13. Na4 {-0.03/9 232} 13... b5 {73} 14. cxb5 {0.51/9 173} 14... Be6 {39} 15.
>Qc2 {0.94/8 68} 15... Rac8 {50} 16. bxc6 {1.07/8 73} 16... Nd5 {43} 17. Kb1 {
>1.51/9 112} 17... f5 {113} 18. h4 {1.67/8 99} 18... e4 {25} 19. g4 {1.07/9 325}
>19... Rb8 {24} 20. gxf5 {1.90/8 249} 20... gxf5 {21} 21. h5 {0.90/8 511} 21...
>Nb4 {63} 22. Bxb4 {-0.40/9 370} 22... Rxb4 {4} 23. Kc1 {-0.87/8 196} 23... Rc4
>{206} 24. Nc3 {-1.30/9 80} 24... Qxc6 {9} 25. Rdg1 {-1.41/9 94} 25... Kh7 {124}
>26. Rh3 {-0.95/8 62} 26... Bd4 {67} 27. Rd1 {-0.74/7 25} 27... Bxf2 {39} 28. e3
>{-0.54/8 31} 28... f4 {114} 29. Qxf2 {0.00/9 0} 29... Rxc3+ {177} 30. bxc3 {
>-0.04/9 0} 30... Qxc3+ {29} 31. Qc2 {1.59/8 37} 31... Qa1+ {74} 32. Kd2 {
>2.14/8 37} 32... Rd8+ {28} 33. Ke1 {2.60/9 10} 33... Rxd1+ {36} 34. Qxd1 {
>2.60/9 6} 34... Qxa2 {32} 35. Bxe4+ {6.56/8 37} 1-0
Hi Odell,
I agree with you that Hiarcs 7.32 makes dumb moves, and sometimes it plays
blunder moves without any reason. I'm not very impressed with this engine, yet,
there are lot of Hiarcs supporters and they tend turn the blind eye, and give
high praise for such a program, perhaps it's because of the hype and expectation
of this engine to be the strongest, but I'm very disappointed with the engine
overall performance. Now that the newest chessbase engine supports tablebases,
such as Nimzo 7.32, I hope that the new Junior will also have tablebases and
Fritz, too.
Laurence
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.