Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Correspondence Chess / Correspondence Chess / Different engines in different openings???
- - By tturgut (**) [us] Date 2013-01-30 21:31
Hi, i would appreciate what you guys think:

1) Is there any data on which engines play better in which specific openings? (For example Houdini may be overall strongest engine, but maybe his score in nimzo-indian is not as good as Rybka etc. or he may be scoring even higher in some openings against himself...)

2) Is there any data on which engine has more accurate evaluation in opening phase? (ie: In my opinion, Rybka is  not very accurate in opening evaluation)

3) Is there any data on which engine is superior in longer time controls (not 2 hours, maybe 24 hr/game or even longer time controls)

i hope all answers are not Houdini....

Tansel Turgut
Parent - By AshtavakraGeeta (*) Date 2013-02-02 03:05

My answers may not be objectively the best ones but they have worked well for me so far... To answer your queries :

(1) It's a little difficult to determine which engine plays a specific type of opening best because for one to arrive at the answer, it's of utmost importance to not only be aware of the strengths & weaknesses of the engines being discussed, but also the positional knowledge (inbuilt into most of the engines these days) also needs to be taken into consideration.
If you do a quick check with an opening like say, the KID, you'll be surprised to see most engines going astray in their evaluations. While I'm not an expert at assessing the strengths & weaknesses of engines, I believe the engine experts in this community may be able to answer this better. In my case, however, RYBKA 3 DYNAMIC is the Best Engine which can understand and play this opening (KID) the Best !!

Another example is the Most Complicated & Chaotic of All Openings - The Semi Slav - and in particular (a) The Botvinik Variation & (b) Moscow & Anti Moscow Variations.
I am yet to come across an engine which can understand the Semi Slav branch of openings perfectly. True, Houdini, Critter, Stockfish & Komodo do a decent job but all of them have been known to falter when exploring the deep labyrinths of this extremely complex but fascinating openings.

(2) In the opening phase, as far as my own humble experience is concerned, I feel Critter to be the Best ! Often, in my own games, I use Databases along with info from NIC, Informator, Chess Evolution & other opening books but always triple check them with Critter just to ensure I'm not missing anything. Houdini 3 often gives over-optimistic evaluations in the first 10 moves which often leads one to the conclusion that one has an advantage right in the opening phase. Rybka is good for middlegame and certain types of endgames but I wouldn't rely on its judgement in the opening phase. There are many areas in which it still has to improve - I'm still a newcomer to this forum & our forum experts here might be able to answer this question much much better than me.

(3) Frankly speaking, I have never experimented with any engine at the time controls mentioned by you but would definitely love to know the results of such tests!
Certain engines like Ivanhoe, Stockfish and Critter when tuned properly have been known to be much stronger than the default versions but since I'm not a programmer, I cannot comment on this.

Your questions are definitely interesting ones and I'd love to know what the Experienced Pros here have to say regarding this.

- AshtavakraGeeta
Up Topic Correspondence Chess / Correspondence Chess / Different engines in different openings???

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill