Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 02:39:33 01/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2000 at 21:45:53, stuart taylor wrote: >On January 14, 2000 at 04:42:19, Bertil Eklund wrote: > >>On January 13, 2000 at 21:59:51, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>On January 13, 2000 at 19:22:20, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>On January 13, 2000 at 18:43:41, Didzis Cirulis wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 13, 2000 at 18:08:49, walter irvin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 13, 2000 at 17:57:11, James T. Walker wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Hello Christophe, >>>>>>>Congratulations on the release of Rebel-Tiger today! I wish you luck and hope >>>>>>>you sell a million copies. >>>>>>>Jim Walker >>>>>> >>>>>>i know i must have it ,i want to see if it is as strong as advertised ? >>>>> >>>>>Believe me, Walter, it is! :-) >>>>> >>>>>Congrats, Christophe! >>>> >>>Were there actual improvements still being made during this period of >>>delay?(e.g.trapped bishop awareness,or similar things.Or improvements of >>>any of its less strong points?)[I wasn't claiming that it lacked sufficient >>>trapped bishop awareness-necesarily]. >>> Indeed, what are its strongest points? >>> Is it top of the field for sure, in any particular area? e.g.Tactics, >>>knowledge, looking ahead, accuracy, human-like, instructiveness to humans, >>>precision, romantic etc? >>>Stuart Taylor >> >>Hi! >> >>IMO it´s the best of all programs in tactics and endgames. The style is very >>unromantic, more like Petrosian, it provokes weaknesses and plays against them. >>The book favours quiet openings i.e. the exchange-variation in French, closed >>Sicilian and so on. The scores are very accurate. >> >>Unfortunately it is some bug(?)in the book-learner with the consequence that it >>loses against 1.d4 over and over. Or is it only a narrow line in the slav >>defence. Anyway it is very boring to see it loosing in the same variation game >>after game after game. I hope this gonna be fixed, otherwise I guess Tiger´s >>first place in the SSDF-list could be a one timer. >> >>Bertil SSDF >> >> But if it is strongest of all in tactics and endgames, how does >hiarcs get 4 good wins over it, and not necesarily by playing 1.d4. >century also gets good wins. Do you mean that if fritzes strength is >mainly its tactics, so tiger will beat it hands down, because it dosn't >have to stand up against the knowledge of say-hiarcs?(against which it had a >very tough time). >>>> >>>>S.Taylor Hi! Tiger won clearly against Hiarcs in my 40 game match on 2h/40. I don´t remember the result but 24-16 or something similar I guess. I don´t think Hiarcs plays better than Fritz. For the moment I think Junior6 and Fritz plays the "best chess". Tiger are better than them in tactics and endgames. So far Fritz5.32 are the only program beating Tiger 21-19 Fritz should probably be outstanding if it wasn´t for the miscalculation when it misjudges some exchanges. As Uri writes it often values an exchange to say +1,5 and in the next move immediately sees the consequences and shows 0.00. In the match against Tiger Fritz was up 1,5-2 about (Tiger agreed) four times and wrongly exchanged down to a equal endgame. Tiger saws it almost immediately. One of the above games Fritz lost after a TB-error. Bertil
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.