Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 11:57:09 12/27/99
How to judge? >Posted by walter irvin on December 27, 1999 at 12:26:07: >rebel century is extremely strong ,i dont play it as much as some of the other >ones i have for 2 reasons .1.rebel never lets me get anything going unlike >hiarcs,fritz,crafty ect . vs them i feel like i have a chance till the end .2. >rebels style is devoid of brilliat moves or moves that ever leave the position >unclear .instead its like the program has a roll of duct tape and he slowly >but surely wraps you up till you have no options left .for me rebel is the >hardest to beat ,in fact so far its the only one i have not beat . At least once a week I receive email in similar wordings. That's of course very nice stuff to read but what puzzles me is Rebel's progress through the years in this respect. I mean this: I am a 1800 player, very bad in tactics but with a positional understanding of 2000, maybe a bit more. How to judge progress in Rebel's positional understanding every time I add new chess knowledge? Has Rebel improved in playing humans since version 8,9,10 and now Rebel Century? To answer this question precise you have to realize that hardware has improved too during the years and people tend not to play old versions which makes it even more difficult to judge its progress. Since times I use the following guide-line to decide which version is best: - test sets (about 1000 positions) 30% as a first impression. - auto232 results (30%) - my personal impression based on my own style and feelings (40%) this includes the GM challenge games as well. How do other programmers decide which version is best? and maybe more important which criteria is involved? I also am curious on opinions if Rebel Century is clearly better than let's say Rebel8 when the subject is playing style which is something different than playing strength (my opinion and view). Ed
This page took 0.01 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.