Steve said this:
i know i am on dangerous ground here when i mention one of the computer's that fall into this category for me...here goes...
the Excalibur GM...(Takes cover)
cost me $199 brand spanking new and i dont think i have gone more then a month without playing it
i especially love the very sturdy plastic pieces...which i can hurl about the room in disgust after losing to an 1800 computer
the fact that you cant turn off the sound is actually a plus because it drowns out the unending chatter from my wife who loves to distract me whenever i find some precious free time to play chess
I have the GM - I do like it. I paid $100 for it, used. I like the idea of it. Among dedicateds, it's unique - possibly the best idea Excalibur ever had, so smart that it's hard to believe no one else tried it. The beautiful wooden boards from Mephisto, Fidelity, TASC et al were an attempt to hit that sweet spot of luxury, but they were/are pricey and temperamental. Excalibur found the answer with the less expensive housing while (remarkably) preserving the auto-sensory element. Again, I like the GM. It plays a nice game - just strong enough to keep you alert - but it's also just a bit big. You've got to set it out and leave it there, and that's not always practical with kids, pets, meals and other distractions. For that reason, I like the slightly smaller plastic boards (i.e., Excellence). You can move them out of the way and come back.
SirDave said this:
But my entry for most value for the ELO buck is the Radio Shack 1680X model 60-2428A which has an ELO of around 1600-1700 and which is a completely different motherboard than the RS 1680X model 60-2428 (which is just the Radio Shack version of the Saitek Olympiad, a too weak board with an ELO of 1200-1300). The model 60-2428A can be found on eBay for $20-50.
Any info on the programmer? Another Radio Shack mystery? Wiki-Elo says it's Craig Barnes...
Mentat (ah, bless Frank Herbert) said this:
I still remember the Excellence and its tenacious and bitter struggle to survive the game.
When I first discovered this forum, I posted a question that plagued me about Excellence. In the early days of my ownership, I tested it against one of my favorite games, a gorgeous miniature: Fischer v Fine, NY 1963, a pretty Evans Gambit. Here are the moves:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4 7.0-0 dxc3 8.Qb3 Qe7 9.Nxc3 Nf6 10.Nd5 Nxd5 11.exd5 Ne5 12.Nxe5 Qxe5 13.Bb2 Qg5 14.h4 Qxh4 15.Bxg7 Rg8 16.Rfe1+ Kd8 17.Qg3 1-0
Here's the key position that led to my old question:
[fen]r1b1k1nr/ppppqppp/2n5/b7/2B1P3/1QN2N2/P4PPP/R1B2RK1 w kq - 0 9[/fen]
The first time I ran Excellence through this game back in the 1980s, it followed Reuben Fine's moves note for note, and played Fine's move, 9...Nf6, which allows Fischer's vicious rejoinder.
I played Fischer's move on the board with joy, and finished off the game. Then I tried to do it again - and Excellence didn't play Fine's move. Instead, it played 9...Bxc3, which obviously changes the character of the game. Almost 30 years have passed since then, and I've tried many times to see if Excellence would repeat Fine's move. It never has.
I know a lot more about how these machines work as a result of intel gained from this forum, but the enigma remains. In the old days, I simply played Excellence at its default level and tried to duplicate Fine's move. I've tried other methods since - changing time controls, ponder off, etc. Nothing works. It made me wonder whether Excellence had some sort of crude learning function. Steve and others assured me that wasn't possible - I accept that, but I love the mystery.
Fernando said this:
1978-1993 are the times indeed
I came to an understanding of the hobby far later, but I think he's right - though the later Novags are pretty cool. My second favorite machine is Obsidian.
Yours in dedicated love regards,
- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells