Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Interesting review for Computer Chess Reports

Author: Mark Ryan

Date: 22:05:11 02/01/00

Go up one level in this thread


On February 02, 2000 at 00:20:15, Aloisio Ponti Lopes wrote:

>I really enjoyed playing against Shredder. Nice interface, strong engine. Very
>nice boards/pieces collection. As I am rated <2000 ELO, I just can't dream of
>beating it, I think; an excellent teacher for my 3 year-old-son!
>I like to play Blitz, and Shredder plays it very well, although it's not the
>best at Blitz, I think. In general, I like Shreddder's more than Rebel's
>GUI(DOS). I just can't imagine how there are people complaining about such a
>well-made program. It really makes my CM 5500 looks like a toy.
>
>I have Hiarcs 7.32 and Fritz 5 (old 16 bit version). ChessBase GUI is really the
>best in my opinion. I tryed the demo version of ChessPartner, did not like that
>GUI. My next buy: Junior. Version=? (I'm just curious and waiting the result of
>that C. Theron- Amir Ban's personal match! ).
>
>About Genius 6.5: nice program, but the GUI is not what I expected. NIMZO 2000:
>nice blitz player, just that.
>
>My congratulations to Stefan Meyer-Kahlen for such a nice program. I don't think
> luck was all that made Shredder the World Champion. Karpov was lucky when
>Fischer did not play the match for the FIDE title, but he played many
>tournaments since then and won most of them, just like Kasparov is doing
>nowadays. I think maybe the problem with Shredder is that it is well-tuned for
>tournament play, not for faster play. In the SSDF list we see Shredder 2, but
>not Shredder 4. The k6 processor is not the best to use with Shredder, and SSDF
>uses K6-450; so for those Shredder results it doesn't seem to be as reliable as
>Karpov's wins or Kasparov's wins at tournaments. Rebel is also a very nice
>engine and it isn't listed (yes, I know why). I know it is very difficult to
>play those matches manually, with so many games, and the AUTO232 protocol seems
>to be old and does not run with all the engines. In the years to come, there'll
>be more engines. So how reliable will this "rating method" be?
>I think playing against IGM is a great way to rate an engine, just what Rebel is
>doing very well. That comp-comp rating is in my opinion, inflated and not
>reliable. I just can't imagine Anand beating Leko 12 games with the same opening
>in double games and inflating his rating! That will _never_ happen! (even a
>child would not loose 12 games in the same opening to an engine with the same
>moves).
>So, this is the way I see the list:
>
>Engine general strengh (CompxComp):
>#1. Tiger 12 (with some future(?) improvements: better book learning)
>#2. Junior 6 (one processor)
>#3. Shredder 4
>#4. Rebel
>
>Engine general strengh (against humans):
>#1. Rebel
>#2. Shredder
>#3. Junior 6
>
>Blitz:
>#1. Nimzo 7.32
>#2. Tiger 12
>#3. Junior 6
>
>Endings:
>#1. Shredder 4
>#2. Junior 6
>
>Tactics:
>#1. Fritz 6
>#2. Junior 6
>#3. ChessMaster 7000
>
>Strategy:
>#1. Rebel-Century
>#2. Hiarcs 7.32
>#3. Shredder 4
>------------------------------------------------------------
>A. Ponti
.



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.