Author: Pierre Bourget
Date: 14:29:14 02/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2000 at 17:15:00, Frank Müller wrote: >Dear Pierre, > >In my opinion "Fatbase" has not the editorial quality like, for example, "Big >Database" published by ChessBase. Some important aspects for a "good" database >you should take into consideration are: small amount of faults in game notation, >no doublettes, homogeneous use of players' names, superior player games, >high-class tournaments (no children tournaments etc.). In every of those aspects >Big Database is preferable to Fatbase. >However, Fatbase 99 costs only approx. 1/2 the price of Big Database 2000. But >you should invest your money in Big Database, despite it's higher price. Many >people do underestimate the editorial amount of work contained in a good chess >database. >Nevertheless, older Fatbase editions seem to be really a bargain. I've seen a >special offer by Rattmann in German chess magazine "Europa Rochade" where >Rattmann offers Fritz6 plus a database (Fatbase 98?) with 1,5 million games for >99,- Deutsche Marks, so that would only be an additional 1,- Marks for the >database. >Some time ago I heard something about a database published by Knut Neven. That >database is said to be also of high editorial standards, primarily with a focus >on superior level games. Unfortunately, I forgot the link of Knut neven's home >page. >Hope this helps you. > >Greetings. >Frank Thanks Frank but i already got Big Database 2000 and i was just asking if Fatbase has more old computer games since Big 2000 has nothing before 1986. I'm sorry i should have indicated that. Regards Pierre
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.