Author: stuart taylor
Date: 07:50:13 02/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2000 at 10:35:56, robert michelena wrote: >Mr. Chen has nicely summed up the differences. With Fritz you get all the bells >and whistles ( editing opening books, ...etc ); Tiger you get playing strength. > In the competitive world of Yahoo advanced chess, my observations, after >approximately 200 games each using Tiger, as well as Fritz and Junior 6, is that >Tiger and Junior are approximately equal in playing strength; Fritz 6 is not >quite as strong. Tiger is strongest, I feel in 10 minute games; Junior is >better in the endgame ( due to its endgame tablebases ). > >To recapitulate, Tiger plays a very solid game of chess; much more so, I feel >then Fritz or the other programs I own. However, in 30 minute games (and >longer) Nimzo 732 is still, in my opinion, stronger then Tiger or Junior 6. > >Note, both junior and fritz were the updated versions I never felt interested in nimzo. But if it is indeed strongest in 30 minute and longer games, then I should have been made aware of it but wasn't. What can be more significant than what a program plays after a couple of minutes to compute? That's the only thing that should count. The idea of chess is not blitz. And anyway, nimzo is surely strong enough at blitz against humans. Comp.vs.comp. blitz is realy not important. S.Taylor
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.