Author: walter irvin
Date: 17:10:01 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
you did not win , have you ever beat hiarcs?????? not long ago i posted that i
thought programs were weak , i was all fired up over the fact that i had beat
hiarcs 7.32 3 games in a row .until i really went over the database of games i
had played vs all the different programs .i was winning games ,but i was losing
them alot more . so what i have tried to do is until i can get a plus score
against a program i will no longer pass judgement on them .now if you can get a
plus score vs hiarcs i'll listen to you .until then you have a weaker player
trying to second guess a stronger player .
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.