The better chess programs are hard to beat today. But they all have their
own particular strengs and weaknesses, I guess. How do the top programs
differ in their style of play? Does anyone know anything about this?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24/11/2020 22:07, Hans wrote:

The better chess programs are hard to beat today. But they all have their
own particular strengs and weaknesses, I guess. How do the top programs differ in their style of play? Does anyone know anything about this?

It is so long since there was any on topic postings here I think this
deserves a reply. They are all basically supergrandmaster strength and
can only be beaten by specific and near perfect anti-computer play.

However, computer guided by a reasonable human player is stronger.

My personal favourite is Shredder because of its more human like play at
club level. Bitbases for perfect endgames being much smaller and faster
than Nalimov. The difference is less now SSDs are so cheap and fast.

Fritz is the oldest of the serious commercial chess programs in
continuous development. Fat Fritz the latest from that stable uses AI
and subverts the graphics card for computation. I don't have it (yet).

Be interested to know what people think of it.

Shredder has fallen by the wayside a little bit with no recent versions
since 13.

Of the free ones Crafty has the longest lineage and Stockfish and Komodo
are two of the strongest. Latest Komodo is no longer free.

It is interesting sometimes to see how their analyses of a position
differs and what things they can miss due to pruning heuristics.
Assuming here you are looking to perfect anti-computer play.

Freezerchess is also an interesting program if you are interested in
theory of endgame play and have time and disk space to use it.

http://www.freezerchess.com

This is another place where you might get more informed answers:

http://talkchess.com/forum3/index.php

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2020 11:03, Martin Brown wrote:

On 24/11/2020 22:07, Hans wrote:

The better chess programs are hard to beat today. But they all have their
own particular strengs and weaknesses, I guess. How do the top programs
differ in their style of play? Does anyone know anything about this?

It is so long since there was any on topic postings here I think this deserves a reply. They are all basically supergrandmaster strength and
can only be beaten by specific and near perfect anti-computer play.

However, computer guided by a reasonable human player is stronger.

My personal favourite is Shredder because of its more human like play at
club level. Bitbases for perfect endgames being much smaller and faster
than Nalimov. The difference is less now SSDs are so cheap and fast.

Fritz is the oldest of the serious commercial chess programs in
continuous development. Fat Fritz the latest from that stable uses AI
and subverts the graphics card for computation. I don't have it (yet).

Be interested to know what people think of it.

Why not use the original? LC0 is open source and stronger. Fat Fritz is
just a rip-off. However, a fast graphics card (GTX 2000-class or better)
is highly recommended.

Shredder has fallen by the wayside a little bit with no recent versions
since 13.

It is obsolete by now.

Of the free ones Crafty has the longest lineage and Stockfish and Komodo
are two of the strongest. Latest Komodo is no longer free.

Stockfish has been the strongest engine for many years now, and they
made a big jump 3 months ago by implementing NN technology. Only Lc0 can
catch up with them.
Crafty is all but dead. Komodo has always been commercial after v. 1
(they give away the next to last version for free). With Dragon, their
latest offering, they jumped on the NN bandwagon.

It is interesting sometimes to see how their analyses of a position
differs and what things they can miss due to pruning heuristics.
Assuming here you are looking to perfect anti-computer play.

For analysing, there's hardly any need for anything but Stockfish.
For playing against engines, there's Lucas Chess. It's not the most
accessible program, but it's the most feature-rich and it's free.
Why should anybody be interested in perfect anti-computer play? That's
like searching for the best way to outpace a motorbike.

Freezerchess is also an interesting program if you are interested in
theory of endgame play and have time and disk space to use it.

http://www.freezerchess.com

This is 15 years old and completely outdated. Who knows if it even runs
under Windows 10.

This is another place where you might get more informed answers:

http://talkchess.com/forum3/index.php

Yep. It's chiefly a place for programmers and enthusiasts but also a
good newscast.

Cheers,
Rainer

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hans schrieb am Dienstag, 24. November 2020 um 23:07:22 UTC+1:

The better chess programs are hard to beat today. But they all have their
own particular strengs and weaknesses, I guess. How do the top programs differ in their style of play? Does anyone know anything about this?

There are, of course, a great many sites on the internet about modern chess programmes, their strengths and weaknesses.
Here are a few:

- https://glarean-magazin.ch/2020/06/01/computerschach-die-besten-engines-der-welt-update-31-best-chess-engines-tournament/
- https://glarean-magazin.ch/2019/08/24/schachprogramme-das-duell-der-engine-giganten-computerschach-chess-programming/
- https://glarean-magazin.ch/2020/05/22/computerschach-nn-und-ab-programme-noch-gleichauf-engine-turniere-chess-tournaments/
(Try the translation at the top left)

Have fun!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)