Author: John Warfield
Date: 04:02:31 12/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 28, 1999 at 04:41:17, Ed Schröder wrote: >>Posted by John Warfield on December 27, 1999 at 20:38:59: >> >>Hi Ed >> >> >> Personally I think you have made a huge improvement with Rebel Century. I have >>been a fan, and customer of rebel since rebel 6 came out. Frankly I did not see >>that much difference between rebel 6 and rebel 8, But I think the improvement >>first came with number 9 version, And now Century is yet another Leap, quite a >>substantial one. > >Thanks for the compliment in the first place. Your observations are very >interesting for me. What in your opinion was it that made Rebel9 so much >better than version 8? Same question for Rebel10 -> Century. I know these >questions are hard to answer because the subjective nature. Keep in mind >you maybe got a faster PC during Rebel9 and Century? > Well as you said my impression is mostly subjective. But after playing hundres of games with 6, , 8, 9, 10, and now century , one gets to get used to the playing styles. A subtle differnece I noticed between version 9 and 10, is that Rebel 10 tended to play more aggressive. Also I felt more pressure on my game out of the opening. Don't get me wrong I thought rebel 9 was extremely strong, infact I have to say, I believe the difference between rebel 10 and century is larger than the differences in rebel 9 and 10. It just seems to me that rebel 10 possessed just a little more finesse than version 9. Another notable diffence in Rebel 10 from nine, was that version 10 seemed to be alot less materialistic, Positional considerations seemed to play a larger role in it's evaluation. It would not hungrily snatch a pawn as 9 would occasionally do. I think the main improvemnt of century over Rebel 10, is that Century now has much more tactical vision then 10, not that I was able to play tactically with version 10, but in my observations in computer vs computer play, i noticed century doesn't get tactically outplayed by the likes of chessmaster and fritz as was the case with rebel 10. Also Century seems to be even more agressive than 10, it has a very nice human feel to it, my games are never boring. it makes beautiful quiet moves that are often seen in grandmaster play. (good example is the Kg6!! in the rebel russek game!) After a game with Century I get a feeling of chess art and apprecatation. I am not claiming any of these observations are facts, i can only say they are crystal clear and evident to me personally. Although Many may not be able to articulate these differences precisely, I am sure that anyone who is a relatively strong chess player, will immediately notice the differences in strength and playing style. >>I hope that in the future you decide to Resume testing rebel on >>ssdf, I think it would probally top the list, or come very close. > >SSDF is important due to the volume of games played. I like to be a part >of it. > >>I think it already tops the list as far as the attrativness of play is concerned. >>Rebel - Tiger may be stronger than Rebel Century but I still believe that Century's >>style is more fun to play with. > >Jeroen Noomen played a manual knock-out tournament with several programs >he owns. Rebel-Tiger beat Rebel Century in the final with 3.5-2.5. Jeroen >is preparing a review of his tournament for publication on the Rebel Home >Page in which he will give his impressions of the participants which IMO >says a lot more than the gained rankings. I am very interested in what >Jeroen has to say about Tiger as not much is known yet except that it is >super strong. > >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.