What do you use chess engines for? Analysis? To stroke yourself silly and gain Elo on playchess.com?bigo wrote:THANKS GEORGE DUE TO YOUR POSTING I AM NOT GOING TO BUY NAUM , ALMOST LOST 60 BUCKS!
Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Moderator: Ras
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
-
- Posts: 4790
- Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:42 am
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Erik Roggenburg wrote:What do you use chess engines for? Analysis? To stroke yourself silly and gain Elo on playchess.com?bigo wrote:THANKS GEORGE DUE TO YOUR POSTING I AM NOT GOING TO BUY NAUM , ALMOST LOST 60 BUCKS!
Note the "All Caps", Erik. He is just trying to be cute and get something started.
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Aha. I still like to poke fun at the Elo addicts on playchess.com, though. Hehehe.geots wrote:Erik Roggenburg wrote:What do you use chess engines for? Analysis? To stroke yourself silly and gain Elo on playchess.com?bigo wrote:THANKS GEORGE DUE TO YOUR POSTING I AM NOT GOING TO BUY NAUM , ALMOST LOST 60 BUCKS!
Note the "All Caps", Erik. He is just trying to be cute and get something started.
I also like to poke fun at people who only rely on one engine for analysis.
-
- Posts: 4562
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:30 am
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Why? I think they do it based on ignorance, and ignorance isn't funny.Erik Roggenburg wrote:I also like to poke fun at people who only rely on one engine for analysis.
-
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:53 am
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Although I almost always use 2 engines for analysis (1 Fruity for depth and one Fritzy not to miss tactics), I still think that one (tactical) engine is good for 99% cases. 2 engines save you time though.
And, btw, I don't understand why people like Rybka so much. IHMO its a crappy engine for analysis. Or I am too weak a player to understand...
And, btw, I don't understand why people like Rybka so much. IHMO its a crappy engine for analysis. Or I am too weak a player to understand...
-
- Posts: 4562
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:30 am
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
But the other 1% could decide a game so for some people (like me) this 1% is unacceptable.playjunior wrote:Although I almost always use 2 engines for analysis (1 Fruity for depth and one Fritzy not to miss tactics), I still think that one (tactical) engine is good for 99% cases.
If Rybka doesn't play like you at all, using it to analyze your game is only going to force you to change your playing style and will only hurt on the end, so I only suggest using Rybka if you already play like it (if you can easily understand Rybka's move choice, it's the best option as it's the strongest engine around.)playjunior wrote:And, btw, I don't understand why people like Rybka so much. IHMO its a crappy engine for analysis. Or I am too weak a player to understand...
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Well I already own Rybka and Fritz so it wouldn't make any sense to me to buy Naum, especially since it's weaker then Rybka, If it had an entertaining style like for instance Gambit Tiger I would consider it, but I haven't heard anything like that, only that it plays in a rybka style. [/quote]
-
- Posts: 4562
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:30 am
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Ditto.bigo wrote:Well I already own Rybka [.] so it wouldn't make any sense to me to buy Naum, [.] If it had an entertaining style like for instance Gambit Tiger I would consider it, but I haven't heard anything like that, only that it plays in a rybka style.
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
Erik Roggenburg wrote:What do you use chess engines for? Analysis? To stroke yourself silly and gain Elo on playchess.com?bigo wrote:THANKS GEORGE DUE TO YOUR POSTING I AM NOT GOING TO BUY NAUM , ALMOST LOST 60 BUCKS!
Nope I'm a Fide rated Tournament Player and I use it for Analysis, I don't play on Playchess at all, by the way the Caps were accidental. I don't see myself as being any different from anyone else, we all want the STRONGEST program, Why do we have various rating list?s??
-
- Posts: 10898
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
- Location: Tel-Aviv Israel
Re: Rybka 2.3.2a v Naum 3- At The Halfway Mark!
[/quote]bigo wrote:Well I already own Rybka and Fritz so it wouldn't make any sense to me to buy Naum, especially since it's weaker then Rybka, If it had an entertaining style like for instance Gambit Tiger I would consider it, but I haven't heard anything like that, only that it plays in a rybka style.
I think that Naum suffers from bad advertisement.
I am sure that there are positions that Naum is better than rybka but the programmer did not try to give example for these positions in the advertisement.
Better advertisement could be something like Naum is better than rybka in some opening like the danish gambit(1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 cxb2)
I do not know if the last claim is correct(more games are needed) but at least Naum won a tournament ahead of rybka in this opening.
I think that it is better for programmers of weaker programs than rybka to look for positions when their program performs better than rybka.
Note that even my relatively weak movei is better than rybka in time to find the winning move in some tactical positions so my guess is that more than one commercial programs can show that their program is number 1 not in rating lists but in some positions(or in playing them or in finding the best move).
Uri