Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 05:53:09 12/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 1999 at 22:26:39, Christophe Theron wrote: >On December 26, 1999 at 18:18:44, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >> >>When Sargon V for PC appeared, it was too late to become a darling. A first >>version for Mac had been a complete failure and in the meantime the mess was >>fixed and the PC version was in the shells, programs like Mchess, Rex and Zarkov >> were those whom asked and received the attention. As I.M. Larry Kaufman said in >>his review - Computer Chess Reports 1991-1992, Vol 2, N°3- “Sargon might have >>been worth recommending if it had come out three years ago...” , although at >>the same time he recognized that in his test with his problem set Sargon, >>running in a 486-33, got 2326 USCF. >>All this maybe seems old history, a chapter for nostalgics, but you well can get >>a surprise if you put Sargon V to run in a decent current Pentium computer. >>Suddenly you realize how good the last programs by Kathe and Dan Spracklen were >>and how far from obsolescence the best of beginnings of 90’s programs in >>general were and are if run with modern stuff. And then you have a material >>demonstration of how much the progress has been based in better equipment and >>not so much in software after all. Not that progress was not made in source >>codes, not that new techniques did not appear, but -and this is a very great >>BUT- sometimes is truly difficult to see the difference between a good current >>commercial program and Sargon. If you still have it, test it and see how he >>handles the endings. Etc. Maybe one of the many pals here that likes to pit >>programs each against other could pit this aparent piece of museum agains, say, >>Rebel or Genius. >> >>Fernando > > >Fernando, you should try Sargon more seriously. It sounds like you only play >yourself against these programs, so you get a very vague idea of how good they >are relatively to each other. > >Sargon loses badly to all the good commercial programs. The faster the computer, >the worse Sargon does. > >This being said, the Spracklens were amongst the heroes of my youth, they have >done an incredibly good job at that time. > > > Christophe Hi: You are right and you are wrong; right that I only play personally against programs; wrong in saying or implying than that is not serious enough. Of course I know sargon have no chances againts top programs, but what I say is that if YOU play a game against it, differences tend to blurr. In other words, to be defeated by a 2500 or to be defeated by a 2350 is not a very different experience after all. In the area of human Vs comps, what I want to say that good stuff like sargon running in fast computers are still very competitive If -another IF- you are not a master, but at most an expert. Remember that an expert is just around 2100 at most and sargon probably is 2350 in pentium, so.... Waiting for Tiger Fernando
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.