playing chess

Playing Chess

Vote and you will find!
Quirky name, real hobbies
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
chilliman 146 ( +1 | -1 )
What Is The Best Analysis Software? I have used ChessMaster on PS2 as an analytical tool up until several weeks ago when it started collapsing for some unknown reason. this has now given me the opportunity to look at spending some money on chess software but I don't know which to get.

I liked ChessMaster as I could play it as a tough or easy opponent depending on my mood. it offered tournaments/training/analysis and was very flexible and easy to use. I liked the analysis aspect as it gave verbal commentary not just point score analysis, thus giving me excellent advice on where I'd blundered.

my internet research has identified four very competitive replacements: Fritz; Shredder; Tiger; and, Hiarcs.

I am after a good solid analysis tool - one that gives verbal commentary.

As far as game playing is concerned, all of these programs appear to be rated 2700+ so a few elo pts either way makes no difference to me as I'll never beat any of them at max strength but I would like to be able to set the strength so I'm not getting whooped all the time. I know I could always buy another ChessMaster but I'm after something with strong analytical skills and I don't want to go buying 2 or 3 of them.

I would like to here from fellow gkers who have either: used two or more of these programs and hear how they compare with each other with regards the above; or, own one and use it as an analytical tool and what their 'satisfaction elo' is. naturally any on-post related comments are also welcome.


bonsai 43 ( +1 | -1 )
Knowning both Fritz and Shredder, I'll say that I like them both. They do evaluate positions remarkably differently sometimes, but both in a sensible way. And yes, you can set them to play close to your own strength level - in fact you can set it to playing in a certain style (e.g. how much should the program care about piece activity, king safety, material, should it always try to attack on the kingside etc.), but there are pre-arranged personalities, too.
floridaflag 17 ( +1 | -1 )
Your best Bet Your Best Bet would be bookup a free download evaluation period, with a lot to check, this would help you at any game play, and downloads in PGN format
ctrl-reset 4 ( +1 | -1 )
Chessbase Is Fritz and Shredder the same as Chessbase 9?
migchess20 66 ( +1 | -1 )
Engines No son los mismos, Considero mas fuerte Fritz que Shredder, Chessbase 9 es una base de datos.
Lo importante es investigar cual es el engine mas fuerte para utilizarlo en los analisis de los juegos realizados.
Recordemos tambien que depende de la capacidad de la computadora,
En Internet hay muchos engines, algunos de ellos son gratis. Hay algun jugador o jugadores que han investigado algo sobre los diferentes engines?
Ademas el ajedrez es infinito, nadie ha llegado a dominarlo.
Los diferentes engines analizan una parte del juego, pero las jugadas brillantes no las tienen grabadas, sino que nacen de nuestro cerebro en un instante determinado.
Lo importante es practicar, practicar y practicar.

Muchos Saludos.

chuckventimiglia 20 ( +1 | -1 )
Chessbase 9 is not..... a chess engine [chess program]. It is a
program that allows you to record and manage
your games. It has many additional features
as well but it does not analyze and suggest

ctrl-reset 2 ( +1 | -1 )
Ok, thanks. Thanks for the clarification.
coyotefan 5 ( +1 | -1 )
What Is The Best Analysis Software? Is the grey matter between your ears :)
ctrl-reset 34 ( +1 | -1 )
I tried... I tried using the grey matter between my ears, but its not working good enough :(
Just look at my ratings.

Care to switch grey matter?

On a serious note, I was wondering how people improve their game play using Chessbase 9 is it doesnt have analysis capabilities?

Thank for your thoughtful answers.
dysfl 53 ( +1 | -1 )
Fritz9 for me I started from Crafty, then moved to Chessmaster 9000, Fritz8 and then switched to Fritz9.

For analysis, I like Fritz9 best. It could be personal choice, though. Crafy can print out the top 5 best moves for each move. Chessmaster was kind of clumsy due to the GUI. I tried Hiracs, but for my system (old AMD XP), it was painfully slow. Fritz9 seems to me better than Fritz8 as it is not so aggressive only.

About the verbal commentary, soon you'll find them almost useless, but Chessmaster makes nice looking commentaries.
coyotefan 25 ( +1 | -1 )
ctrl-reset You are correct, CB9 is not a real analysis tool. It tells you what the most popular moves are and the % of wins each move attained. It is that old grey matter that does the analysis. Fritz has an analysis tool, but IMHO it is not very good.
chilliman 2 ( +1 | -1 )
migchess20 inglÚs por favor
ctrl-reset 51 ( +1 | -1 )
coyotefan ...thanks for the explanation. I'm using Chessbase Light at the moment, and for my rating, it can still spot lots of mistakes. But I have to go through each move manually. I was hoping for a software that can go through my game automatically, without me clicking the Next button, and I think Fritz and Chessmaster can do so.

Since Fritz is highlighted more in the forums than Chessmaster, I will tend to go with Fritz 8 then. I am so lowly ranked that I dont think its makes a difference if I got version 8 or 9.

Thanks for the clarification.
coyotefan 8 ( +1 | -1 )
Reason Fritz highlighted more Is that everytime anyone accuses others of cheating, Fritz is mentioned.

migchess20 71 ( +1 | -1 )
They are not the same, I Consider but hardly Fritz that Shredder.
Chessbase 9 is a database. What is important is to investigate which is the engine but hardly to utilize it in the analisis of the play carried out.
We recall tambien that depends on the capacity of the computer, on the Internet there are many engines, some of them they are free.
There is algun player or players that have investigated something on the different engines?
The chess is infinite, nobody has come dominate it. The different engines analyze a part of the play, but them played brilliant do not have them engravings, but they are born of our in a moment specific brain.
What is important is to practice, to practice and to practice.

So long


tag1153 32 ( +1 | -1 )
I just bought Shredder.... ....after playing in an OTB tournament. Still trying to figure everything out, but it is very easy to use. I fed my tourney games into it, and it did a good job of pointing out better moves I could have made. Seems like a user-friendly tool......

chilliman 2 ( +1 | -1 )
my thanks to all who have posted.
odonata 52 ( +1 | -1 )
In my opinion Chess engines are good to analyse middle games and endgames and to see immediate tactical opportunities, but usually they are not a great help for the opening (no new ideas or long term decisions).
I've got Fritz8 and Hiarcs10.
Hiarcs 10 looks to me definetely stronger, evaluates postions more precise and calculates a lot faster, especially in the endgame.
As for the openings I'd advice you to buy books... Chess engines are not good there, actually most of them have an opening tree based on the current theory as it is brought by the recent games of the GM's...
ferdyrojo 73 ( +1 | -1 )
Chess engines or the philosophal stone? Dear "odonata",

I absolutely agree with your assertion, (sic): "chess engines usually are not a great help for the opening of a chess game". They are only very powerful calculators, but Chess is not just a calculation game but a tactical game, based on the vision or intuition of a particular position.
I have tried Shredder for a trial period and I have Fritz 8 installed in my Hard Drive. I consider Shredder's algorithms to be better than Fritz 8's in calculation strength. Anyway, if you set any of them in the program mode, they start to play itself by generating tipically algorithmic moves until it reaches a Draw position. I consider it to be an ugly chess game.

KR (Kind Regards)
magna68 85 ( +1 | -1 )
odonata I have to dissagree with you on few things here. First, chess engines have always been known for lacked strenght in endgame "understanding".
Then, it's just wrong to say that chess engines are not good in the openings. The explotion of opening theory and understanding in recent years can on contrary be directly traced to chess engines. The opening reportorie is included to save time to the engines, not because they don't know how to play in the opening. True, it's built from recent GM's games, but much of what GM's play nowondays in the opening is something they have carfully studied (or cooked) at home, not alone, but with the strongest engines available working overtime. This has off course led to the sad fact that there is much less space for creativity in the openings than it used to be on gm's level.