Shredder

[easyking]

Will we ever see Shredder 12 ? and if so, will it give Rybka a run for the money ? Hope so !

[fern]

I do not know if it will give Ryba a run, but it will bring a very advanced mechanism to simulate players of diferent Elo. That is more important to me than his capabilities to defeat Rybka. Even if Shredder cannot do it, still is a very strong engine, lot stronger than any of us.
regards
fdern

[Sylwy]

Will we ever see Shredder 12 ? and if so, will it give Rybka a run for the money ? Hope so !

Hi !
Good question !
They are now only three chess engines in real big development:
Rybka
Naum
Thinker
The development of the others chess engines is in crisis. IDEAS CRISIS - a serious disease for a project.Fruit source code was the life-buoy for some. The GUI and some features (simulations of a weak player ,tutorials...... ) seems to be the salvation -on short term- for some commercial projects : Fritz, Shredder,maybe Chessmaster.....
On long term ??????
I always appreciate some talented authors with a good sense of reality: Dave Kittinger, Marty Hirsch,John Stanback,Ed Schroder.............

The free zone of chess engines knows an analogous situation.Some good sources : Fruit, Glaurung and around these sources an explosion of derivatives.The rest of the free zone : amateurs / pseudo erudites / long term experimentalists without a real progress.


Regards,
Silvian

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

They are now only three chess engines in real big development:
[blablabla]
The development of the others chess engines is in crisis. IDEAS CRISIS - a serious disease for a project.[blablabla]

Aprils fools, ahahah, you almost got me!

[mclane]

Will we ever see Shredder 12 ? and if so, will it give Rybka a run for the money ? Hope so !

Hi !
Good question !
They are now only three chess engines in real big development:
Rybka
Naum
Thinker

i have to disagree. IMO computerchess is not about beeing on the top .
there are many chess engines that make progress.only they make it
on a lower scale of the ranking list.

for my hobby it is completely unimportant where this progress happens.
i am happy to see ANY program make progress. and i would be pleased
about a new genius, a new pro deo, a new mchess or a new wchess engine with 50 ELO progress.

its the progress that counts IMO: that is what computerchess is all about.

i will give you an example:

i remember times when chess genius was really the leader of the gang.

in those days i saw programs making good progress and some more unknown programs suddenly were able to catch genius and beat it.

i am sure if you would take the old genius sources, one could improve them with 100 elo or more.

[Sylwy]

Will we ever see Shredder 12 ? and if so, will it give Rybka a run for the money ? Hope so !

Hi !
Good question !
They are now only three chess engines in real big development:
Rybka
Naum
Thinker

i have to disagree. IMO computerchess is not about beeing on the top .
there are many chess engines that make progress.only they make it
on a lower scale of the ranking list.

for my hobby it is completely unimportant where this progress happens.
i am happy to see ANY program make progress. and i would be pleased
about a new genius, a new pro deo, a new mchess or a new wchess engine with 50 ELO progress.

its the progress that counts IMO: that is what computerchess is all about.

i will give you an example:

i remember times when chess genius was really the leader of the gang.

in those days i saw programs making good progress and some more unknown programs suddenly were able to catch genius and beat it.

i am sure if you would take the old genius sources, one could improve them with 100 elo or more.

Hi Thorsten !

Maybe you are right....... but , years ago was the golden age of computer chess. Only some pioneers and only some programs.Every idea , every progress counted. Today is an inflation in this area. And in inflation only the strong "coins" count.

Regards,
Silvian

[mclane]

i have to disagree again. there were PLENTY of programs in that time.
we had many programmers. most of them do NOT program today anymore.

stanback, daily, schroeder, morsch, lang, kittinger, uniacke, theron,
hirsch, bryant, ... whittington, weil/baudot, meyer-kahlen, donninger, ...

plenty of guys.

it is IMO nonsense to say that only the STRONG ONES count.

we had much variance.
and the programs were all very different.

most of them played completely different and were much specialized in some areas.

now - today - we heavily miss those who resigned.

because they ALL gave much.
this "race" on top is IMO completely unimportant because it does not give the community ANYTHING.

[Nimzovik]

I for one would really love to see an engine focus on playing the closed game.... W chess was excellent in this area relatively speakng. One that could not let Pablo draw it with his stonewalls! is a goal here I think..........

[PauloSoare]

An engine with a strong endgame would not be an attractive to users?

[GenoM]

So, some authors came to the "new paradigma" in chess. I'm glad to see it.