03 Nov '07 21:34>
Originally posted by ChipotleThat may be true, and I'm sure there are a lot of interesting issues there. I'm not saying engine performance is exactly the same vs. engines as vs. humans--I just don't think it's *radically* different, and certainly not enough to make a difference in the context of this discussion.
I'm not sure about today, but a couple of years ago the strongest engine v. engine programs were not the strongest vs. human GMs. It seems odd, but the best engines vs. humans have to have enough opening DB or positional understanding to rip open a position in their favor, where in an engine vs engine game, there isn't any hiding behind walls of pawns in a closed game.
For whatever it's worth, I seem to notice on ICC that when the same engine is set up to accept matches only vs. humans, or to accept matches against both humans and engines, the one that plays only vs. humans always seems to have a higher rating.
But in any case, the original discussion was about Chessmaster. I'm sure there are plenty of valid criticisms you can lodge against Chessmaster, but the engine being too weak is not a very good one IMO. Anyone who needs an engine stronger than Chessmaster is pretty sophisticated and probably already knows exactly what they're doing. For just about anyone who would consider buying CM, the included engine is fine.