Author: James T. Walker
Date: 18:47:32 01/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2000 at 05:39:33, Bertil Eklund wrote: >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 Fritz 5.32 still cannot read the endgame CD properly and should not be punished for the Chessbase inability to fix it. It should by used without the CD and it will do just as good and probably better. Fritz 6 seems to work OK with the tablebases but until I get a final working version I will hold my judgement. Sometimes it takes a long time for the problem to show up unless you spend many hours just testing tablebases. Jim Walker
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.