I have Fritz 10 and like it best of the ones I've tried. I'm a beginner, so most of the good chess programs can beat me even at lower levels. However, none of the various software feels like a human being. Strange that playing online against a real person (that I can't shake hands with or see) still feels very different than playing a computer.
One difference between Chessmaster 10 and Fritz 12 (I have both), is that Fritz can resign, Chessmaster play until you checkmate him. Chessmaster has different personalities, with ratings between 600 to chessmaster 2900+. Fritz just have option to alter his playing style and strength to match your skill.
I like that chessmaster never resigns. I think Fritz is resigning to early not a great trainer.my point is that I have learned to avoid stalemate traps in chessmaster namely because chessmaster never resigns. I know even in a clear winning position I have to play precise. otb in 25 minutes games knowing how to win fast is important and know how to prevent stalemate traps.therefore I am never annoyed by players that doesn't resign because I am not used to players resigning in my training.
Perhaps a collaborat8ive project would be of interest to discern some new opening, middle game and endgame strategies, by calculating recombinant chess game based on endings (and recalculated games leading thus) of like a pawn and a king v. knight and king, showing who would strategize an opening that led to point variable and defeat at the end of the game, with the pawned king sructure likely to win because of an easy possible queening.
But the computer would have to calculate with each player playing each side of the game being of sufficient rate (say 1300-1500elo v. 1500-2200elo), so as to eliminate the computer discovering games where useless errors would not have occurred in tournament like play.
And then, because there would be so many possible ways this ending could be achieved, discover which computer recombinant proof where the number of different games, say >1 or >2 possessed the first six exact same moves for the side superior (king and bishop or king and pawn, v. inferior, king and knight or king and rook, possible allowing for random association at endgame point..though more hefty calcs) at the conclusion of the game. let's try it mates
but I was also wondering on the point, and please correct me, who would be based on averages more likely to win, with whatever opening, white or black... and why is it such a racially divisive game for God's sake??????
I just got Chessmaster 10, and I'm seriously impressed. Fritz has a bit more depth and I like some aspects of it more, but Chessmaster is the better teacher (at least for me). And I agree, being able to play Capablanca or Petrosian (which I've tried) is very interesting.
On Fritz you can ignore the resignation by insisting the computer make a move.
I've upgraded to Fritz 13, so the comments about Fritz 10 should be applied to 13. I've learned plenty from both Fritz and Chessmaster.
I don't know why UBI doesn't make Chessmaster any more. Great program.
Wow, what's the cheapest program? Thanks for the int.
I think the chess GUI/Engine is Dasher.. This already has personalities with set ratings that range from 1000 to 2700..
Isn't this essentially like asking why Super-GMs don't play like NMs?
I'm partial to Hiarcs for natural moves at novice and club levels. It's stronger than its rating at the lowest levels, but that's about the only criticism I can think of.
Shredder gets honorable mention. At novice levels it can't seem to remember the basic checkmates.
Yes Hiarcs is known for it's human like play. There is a guy named Mato Jelic on youtube that comments on a few notable games of Hiarcs vs. other powerful engines.
The Ivanov Engine.
I've just been playing Tal on chess master and actually managed a draw. Play style was nothing like tal. very boring game with just kings left on the board. I want somthing that actually plays like him. Not just shares his name.
What about Houdini and Stockfish?