Winboard Engines and Game Analysis

[shaxmatist]

Please forgive me for posting this topic in an inappropriate place.
If it is, please feel free to move it and let me know where it is.

To wit, I am curious about the strength of the engine named: Fruit 2.1.
How strong is it with respect to game analysis?

Further, how would you evaluate its strength on a FIDE or USCF rating level?

I realize that may be a difficult question as it may be subjective.
But, just in the ballpark, so to speak, would you evaluate its strength beyond 2000?

Certainly, this does not include the openings.
I'm not familiar with the opening database included with Fruit 2.1.

Anyway, I would be more concerned with its calculation strength compared to a player of Master level or beyond.

What do you think?

[H.G.Muller]

You can look up its computer rating on the CCRL list. These ratings cannot be directly compared to FIDE ratings, however. Computers and humans have different strengths and weaknesses, so even if a program is of master strength playing against that program would be quite different from playing a human master.

My guess is that Fruit would be of GM strength, but it might be that with enough practice human GMs would learn to exploit its weaknesses, and systematically beat it. (While the program would never learn anything.)

[shaxmatist]

Thank you so much for your kind and informative reply.

It's funny that a long time ago, I exploited a weakness in a computer that played "Suicide Chess," and managed to get into the top 20 in the world in that category.
It was on a German chess server.

Naturally, the game (suicide chess or giveaway chess) has been "solved" by now.
(Presumably) & most probably.

Nevertheless, you are absolutely correct in you assessment.

Pure calculation happens to be the key.

It's potentially scary, but "technological singularity" is on the way.
It sounds like a crackpot idea right now, but it is inevitable.

What do you think?