Author: Pillsbury
Date: 18:54:43 09/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 26, 1999 at 01:11:08, Mark Young wrote:
>On September 25, 1999 at 23:51:23, Laurence Chen wrote:
>
>>Below are two games which I manually played CM6666 from Shep's web site against
>>Hiarcs 7.32. Hiarcs 7.32 was using its own opening book, and tablebases, running
>>on a Pentium 233 MMX, with 128 MB Ram. Chessmaster was using a Cyrix 6x86 200
>>MHz, 16 MB of Ram. It's impressive to see that CM was able to outplay Hiarcs
>>positionally in both games. The first game is very informative in the
>>demonstration of how CM restrain Hiarcs 7.32, takes its time to mobilize its
>>forces and go for the kill (restrain, blockade, destroy). In my previous post I
>>said that I was not impressed with the performance of Hiarcs 7.32, so if any of
>>you Hiarcs die-hards can find out where your Hiarcs plays different I would like
>>to know. Hiarcs 7.32 was running in Windows NT 4.0 SP4.
>>Laurence Chen
>
>What is the point of this post, that Chessmaster can beat Hiarcs 7.32 two games
>in a row. That not news or showing me anything, anyone who has Chessmaster knows
>it is one of the top programs and a two game match is like flipping a coin.
>
>If this post is meant to show that Chessmaster is stronger then Hiarcs 7.32 and
>supports your opinion, it falls far short with just two games played.
>
>I have both Chessmaster and Hiarcs7.32 and have said from day one after testing
>Chessmaster 6000 it would hit the top of the SSDF list, but the proof you give
>here to support your opinion that Chessmaster 6000 is superior to Hiarcs 7.32 is
>inadequate. It would not be hard to produce two games where Hiarcs 7.32 beat
>Chessmaster 6666 and claim the opposite conclusion.
>
>
>
>>
>>[Event "Level=120'/40+60'/20+30'. "]
>>[Site " "]
>>[Date "1999.09.24"]
>>[Round "?"]
>>[White "Hiarcs 7.32"]
>>[Black "CM6666"]
>>[Result "0-1"]
>>[ECO "B01"]
>>[PlyCount "80"]
>>[EventDate "1999.09.21"]
>>
>>{131072kB, hiarcs.ctg. Pentium
>>} 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nf3 Qe4+ 4. Be2 {
>>0.53/9} 4... Qg6 5. O-O {0.55/9} 5... Bh3 6. Ne1 {0.14/11} 6... Nf6 7. d4 {
>>0.53/9} 7... Nc6 8. d5 {0.39/9} 8... O-O-O 9. Bd3 {0.53/9} 9... Rxd5 10. Nc3 {
>>0.55/9} 10... Rxd3 11. cxd3 {0.60/10} 11... e5 12. Be3 {0.51/9} 12... Be7 13.
>>Rc1 {0.48/8} 13... Rd8 14. Qa4 {0.30/9} 14... a6 15. f4 {0.08/9} 15... Be6 16.
>>Ne2 {0.04/8} 16... Ng4 17. Rf3 {0.00/8} 17... Bd7 18. Qb3 {0.00/8} 18... Nxe3
>>19. Rxe3 {-0.70/10} 19... exf4 20. Re4 {-0.77/10} 20... f5 21. Rec4 {-1.11/9}
>>21... Qd6 22. R4c2 {-1.08/9} 22... Kb8 23. Kh1 {-1.09/8} 23... Bh4 24. Nf3 {
>>-1.02/9} 24... Bf2 25. a3 {-1.25/9} 25... Be3 26. Re1 {-1.34/9} 26... h6 27.
>>Qc3 {-1.52/9} 27... g5 28. Rf1 {-1.70/9} 28... g4 29. Ne1 {-1.80/9} 29... Re8
>>30. b4 {-1.75/9} 30... Nd4 31. Nxd4 {-2.14/11} 31... Bxd4 32. Qd2 {-2.14/10}
>>32... Bb5 33. Ra2 {-2.80/10} 33... Qe5 34. Rc2 {-2.98/10} 34... h5 35. Qc1 {
>>-3.84/10} 35... h4 36. Qd1 {-4.54/9} 36... h3 37. Qd2 {-5.41/9} 37... hxg2+ 38.
>>Nxg2 {-5.66/9} 38... f3 39. Nh4 {-6.72/7} 39... Qh8 40. Nxf3 {-8.50/7} 40...
>>gxf3 0-1
>>
>>[Event "Level=120'/40+60'/20+30'. "]
>>[Site " "]
>>[Date "1999.09.25"]
>>[Round "?"]
>>[White "CM6666"]
>>[Black "Hiarcs 7.32"]
>>[Result "1-0"]
>>[ECO "D07"]
>>[PlyCount "111"]
>>[EventDate "1999.09.21"]
>>
>>{131072kB, hiarcs.ctg. Pentium
>>} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nc3 e6 4. e3 Nf6 5. Nf3
>>Bd7 {0.20/10} 6. Bd3 Nb4 {0.06/9} 7. Be2 dxc4 {0.09/9} 8. Bxc4 c5 {0.07/9} 9.
>>O-O cxd4 {-0.02/8} 10. exd4 Rc8 {0.08/9} 11. Qe2 Be7 {0.01/9} 12. Bg5 O-O {
>>-0.04/9} 13. Ne5 h6 {-0.01/8} 14. Bh4 a6 {0.06/8} 15. Bb3 Be8 {0.18/8} 16. Rfd1
>>Nbd5 {0.31/8} 17. Qd3 g5 {0.11/8} 18. Bg3 Kg7 {0.41/8} 19. Rac1 Qa5 {0.44/8}
>>20. Nc4 Qd8 {0.30/9} 21. Nxd5 Nxd5 {0.13/9} 22. Nd6 Rxc1 {0.21/9} 23. Nxe8+
>>Rxe8 {0.00/9} 24. Rxc1 h5 {0.00/9} 25. h4 gxh4 {0.00/9} 26. Be5+ f6 {0.00/10}
>>27. Bc2 Rh8 {0.00/10} 28. Bh2 f5 {-0.02/9} 29. Bb3 Bf6 {0.13/9} 30. Qe2 Kf7 {
>>0.25/9} 31. Re1 Qd7 {0.00/10} 32. Be5 Bxe5 {0.00/10} 33. Qxe5 Rg8 {0.00/9} 34.
>>Rc1 Kg6 {0.26/9} 35. Rc5 Rc8 {0.30/9} 36. Ba4 b5 {0.00/9} 37. Bb3 Nf6 {0.31/9}
>>38. f3 Nd5 {0.30/9} 39. Bxd5 Rxc5 {0.00/10} 40. dxc5 exd5 {0.00/10} 41. Qd4 Qe7
>>{0.30/10} 42. Kf1 Qg5 {0.00/9} 43. f4 Qg4 {0.00/9} 44. c6 h3 {0.00/10} 45. gxh3
>>Qxh3+ {0.00/10} 46. Ke1 Qh1+ {0.00/9} 47. Ke2 Qc1 {0.00/9} 48. Qxd5 Qxb2+ {
>>0.00/9} 49. Kd3 Qb1+ {0.00/9} 50. Kd4 Qc1 {1.92/8} 51. Qe6+ Kg7 {5.80/10} 52.
>>Qe7+ Kg6 {5.80/10} 53. c7 Qxf4+ {6.09/9} 54. Kc5 Qf2+ {6.09/10} 55. Kc6 Qxa2 {
>>6.48/8} 56. c8=Q 1-0
YOU MUST BE KIDDING!!!!
If CM60000000 is so good, why did not it get a fast computer in SSDF????????
This site is for serious chess....Please dont joke around!!!!!
Pillsbury
HIARCS 7.32 RULZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.