Most underestimated winboard engine?

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Aaron at 14 May 2000 13:03:57:
Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?
I think it should be TCB..
Among the top few, there are many supporters of Anmon,Goliath,SOS,Phalanx,Gormit etc but how come no one mentions TCB? Altough there may not be as may updates as the rest , the results i have seen places it within the top half even among the "Elite" ..
Other most underestimated might include Zchess,Bringer

[A8A]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: A8A at 14 May 2000 14:43:37:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Most underestimated winboard engine? geschrieben von: / posted by: Aaron at 14 May 2000 13:03:57:

Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?
I think it should be TCB..
Among the top few, there are many supporters of Anmon,Goliath,SOS,Phalanx,Gormit etc but how come no one mentions TCB? Altough there may not be as may updates as the rest , the results i have seen places it within the top half even among the "Elite" ..
Other most underestimated might include Zchess,Bringer

Hello:
I don't underestimated all the Engines you mentioned because Zchess is one of my favorite Engines.
The same matter is Crux and LamChop.
But, I cannot refuse Little Goliath because it has the most spectacular game style.
Best Regards.

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 14 May 2000 23:09:10:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Most underestimated winboard engine? geschrieben von: / posted by: Aaron at 14 May 2000 13:03:57:

Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?
I think it should be TCB..
Among the top few, there are many supporters of Anmon,Goliath,SOS,Phalanx,Gormit etc but how come no one mentions TCB? Altough there may not be as may updates as the rest , the results i have seen places it within the top half even among the "Elite" ..
Other most underestimated might include Zchess,Bringer

I don't know if any of those programs are underestimated. By some they would be, but there's plenty of tournaments that show about where they all stand. TCB is one of my favorite Winboard engines, it's _also_ one of the oldest, so it's got to be one of the more tested engines around, TCB plays a very slick game.
But maybe wait 5 or 6 years and see which programs we've underestimated the progress of! Take a look at the programs that are now medium or low strength programs, now which ones will progress the most in the next 5 years. Now we're talking about overestimating or underestimating something that we have no possible way of measuring; future progress of programs. Within the last week, we got 2 brand new Winboard programs, Golem & Storm! Any estimations about where they'll be in 5 years? I have no idea, the paint's not even dry yet.
Pete

[A8A]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: A8A at 15 May 2000 03:05:50:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Underestimating progress of programs geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 14 May 2000 23:09:10:

Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?
I think it should be TCB..
Among the top few, there are many supporters of Anmon,Goliath,SOS,Phalanx,Gormit etc but how come no one mentions TCB? Altough there may not be as may updates as the rest , the results i have seen places it within the top half even among the "Elite" ..
Other most underestimated might include Zchess,Bringer

I don't know if any of those programs are underestimated. By some they would be, but there's plenty of tournaments that show about where they all stand. TCB is one of my favorite Winboard engines, it's _also_ one of the oldest, so it's got to be one of the more tested engines around, TCB plays a very slick game.
But maybe wait 5 or 6 years and see which programs we've underestimated the progress of! Take a look at the programs that are now medium or low strength programs, now which ones will progress the most in the next 5 years. Now we're talking about overestimating or underestimating something that we have no possible way of measuring; future progress of programs. Within the last week, we got 2 brand new Winboard programs, Golem & Storm! Any estimations about where they'll be in 5 years? I have no idea, the paint's not even dry yet.
Pete

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Aaron at 15 May 2000 15:35:09:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Underestimating progress of programs geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 14 May 2000 23:09:10:

Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?

I don't know if any of those programs are underestimated. By some they would >be, but there's plenty of tournaments that show about where they all stand.
TCB is one of my favorite Winboard engines, it's _also_ one of the oldest,
But maybe wait 5 or 6 years and see which programs we've underestimated the > >progress of!

Well not everyone has your keen insight about the "Real strenght" of each engine, so it's likely that there are some engines that are more underestimated than others.
Which I think makes lots of people underestimate its strenght..People talk about how fast Goliath is, how natural and aggressive Phalanx is etc..But the only time I see people mention TCB is to say that it's only good at Blitz..


That's a completely different question ,interesting though.

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 15 May 2000 20:38:38:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Underestimating progress of programs geschrieben von: / posted by: Aaron at 15 May 2000 15:35:09:

Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?

I don't know if any of those programs are underestimated. By some they would >be, but there's plenty of tournaments that show about where they all stand.
TCB is one of my favorite Winboard engines, it's _also_ one of the oldest,
But maybe wait 5 or 6 years and see which programs we've underestimated the > >progress of!

Well not everyone has your keen insight about the "Real strenght" of each engine, so it's likely that there are some engines that are more underestimated than others.
Which I think makes lots of people underestimate its strenght..People talk about how fast Goliath is, how natural and aggressive Phalanx is etc..But the only time I see people mention TCB is to say that it's only good at Blitz..

That's a completely different question ,interesting though.

Sorry, I don't have any "keen insight". I prefer programs that have been around for years and have allot of polish to them, Comet, Crafty, TCB, but I don't think they're really underestimated (in the case of Crafty, it may be a bit overestimated)
I'm not a big fan of how LGoliath plays Chess. It's _very_ strong, but for playing games against programs myself, I can live without LGoliath.
I was tring to change the subject, I ran out of things to say.
Pete

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Aaron at 16 May 2000 18:57:19:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Underestimating progress of programs geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 15 May 2000 20:38:38:

Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?

I don't know if any of those programs are underestimated.
But maybe wait 5 or 6 years and see which programs we've underestimated the > >progress of!

Well not everyone has your keen insight about the "Real strenght" of each >>engine, so it's likely that there are some engines that are more >>underestimated than others.
That's a completely different question ,interesting though.

Sorry, I don't have any "keen insight". I prefer programs that have been >around for years and have allot of polish to them, Comet, Crafty, TCB, but I >don't think they're really underestimated.
(in the case of Crafty, it may be a >bit overestimated)
I'm not a big fan of how LGoliath plays Chess. It's _very_ strong, but for >playing games against programs myself, I can live without LGoliath.
I was tring to change the subject, I ran out of things to say.

As i said not everyone has being around as long as you have, and you might not underestinmate TCB but than everyone is not as experienced as you..

Here I disagree with you. Crafty is clearly best among the winboards

So either I'm overestimating crafty and/or underestimating the rest or you are underestimating crafty..See, there is room for discussion here.. But of course, you don't over estimate or underestimate engines since you know them better than anyone else..
But if you admit that you lack this certainty isn't it likely you overestimate or more probably underetimate crafty?

Not liking the style is not the same as underestimating it..Anyway currently Goliath appears to be leading the polls as the favourite or something..


Okay..Perhaps my question was poor for a forum of winboard experts who knows the true strenght of all the engines such that they don't over or under estimate any of them..

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 16 May 2000 21:59:22:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Underestimating progress of programs geschrieben von: / posted by: Aaron at 16 May 2000 18:57:19:

Just wondering which engine do you think is the most underestimated?

I don't know if any of those programs are underestimated.
But maybe wait 5 or 6 years and see which programs we've underestimated the > >progress of!

Well not everyone has your keen insight about the "Real strenght" of each >>engine, so it's likely that there are some engines that are more >>underestimated than others.
That's a completely different question ,interesting though.

Sorry, I don't have any "keen insight". I prefer programs that have been >around for years and have allot of polish to them, Comet, Crafty, TCB, but I >don't think they're really underestimated.
(in the case of Crafty, it may be a >bit overestimated)
I'm not a big fan of how LGoliath plays Chess. It's _very_ strong, but for >playing games against programs myself, I can live without LGoliath.
I was tring to change the subject, I ran out of things to say.

As i said not everyone has being around as long as you have, and you might not underestinmate TCB but than everyone is not as experienced as you..
Here I disagree with you. Crafty is clearly best among the winboards

So either I'm overestimating crafty and/or underestimating the rest or you are underestimating crafty..See, there is room for discussion here.. But of course, you don't over estimate or underestimate engines since you know them better than anyone else..
But if you admit that you lack this certainty isn't it likely you overestimate or more probably underetimate crafty?
Not liking the style is not the same as underestimating it..Anyway currently Goliath appears to be leading the polls as the favourite or something..


Okay..Perhaps my question was poor for a forum of winboard experts who knows the true strenght of all the engines such that they don't over or under estimate any of them..

I like Crafty a whole lot, I think it's the strongest in most situations. But I get tired of the bandwagon of people who think Crafty is the King of all Earth. But I do beleive Robert Hyatt has more backround in Chess programming than probably anyone else making Winboard engines, so it's not teribly surprizing that it's the strongest.
This isn't true at all. I've only been using Winboard for approximatly a year, I'm not sure exactly how long. I don't know better than anyone else.
I'm a little bit surprized by that, since the wording is "Which engine plays most interesting chess". But the question is about personal preference. As far as "interesting chess", LGol is not real high on _my_ list of favorites to play against. The top of my list would go (in order) Comet, TCB, Crafty, Amy. Ok, but that's just what _I_ prefer to play against.
But if the most people in general think that LGol plays the "most interesting chess", then LGol should without a doubt win. Somewhat related; In the goliath.ini file, I've changed the "combination=off" to "combination=on", because even though it plays a much weaker game that way, I find it much more interesting. I still can't beat it this way.
I'm not an expert, I just like Chess programs, that's all.
Pete

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Aaron at 17 May 2000 14:06:46:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Underestimating progress of programs geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 16 May 2000 21:59:22:

Goliath appears to be leading the polls as the favourite or something..
Okay..Perhaps my question was poor for a forum of winboard experts who knows >>the true strenght of all the engines such that they don't over or under >>estimate any of them..

I'm a little bit surprized by that, since the wording is "Which engine plays >most interesting chess". But the question is about personal preference. As >far as "interesting chess", LGol is not real high on _my_ list of favorites to >play against.
But if the most people in general think that LGol plays the "most interesting >chess", then LGol should without a doubt win.
I'm not an expert, I just like Chess programs, that's all.

I don't really care for Lgol either..People who like to see high numbers are of course excited by it's high node count or whatever..But seriously though it's kinda scary to watch Gormit vers Goliath matches..It's can't be possible but it seems to me that i once watched gormit searching only 3-5 ply and Goliath was already at 7..
I like Gormit though and Anmon as well..Anmon seems to be tuned someway to try positional sacs in games, they don't usually work in computer matches but it's still quite entertaining..
Strenght wise I don't think Crafty is always king..At sudden death blitz Tcs say 5 mins sure, it's untouchable . I find that in time trouble it's closest rival Goliath plays very weak..
But at medium rapid time controls such as 30 0, I find crafty strangly vulnerable to espically Gromit and other top engines..I'm not sure but I think at tournament controls Crafty comes back on top again..
.
For all we know some goliath Maniac fan is stuffing the ballet box..

Actually i wasn't talking about you..Just people in general who fequent this board..They tend to play and follow results of computer tournaments, so most of their views won't be too off base..