De Luxe Talking Touch Chess

[Fernando]

This hand-held machine by defunct Excalibur probably was the very best hand-held chess unit ever made. Of course it has been surpassed by any tablet running a chess app with lot better graphics, speed, etc, not to mention the engines, BUT just in the realm of dedicated unit certainly was the most comfortable to use, with the best screen display, more options, etc. NOT the strongest, but, I insist, the most enjoyable.

Now, we must see the strength factor..... and I will not discuss IF this was a Nelson baby or not.
What I will discuss is about the strength the machine is said to have.
The maker said it was 2000; every specialized site says it is 1650.
I disagree with both.
After many games played with it -and with SO many units along my life- I believe I have experience enough to qualify performance against HUMANS in an accurate fashion.
De Luxe is certainly not 2000, but neither is 1650.
I would say that running at 40/90 is at least 1800.
It is VERY good defending, decently good in endings, average good as any engine in middle game and less than good in the transition from opening to middle game. IF it survives without so much damage this, the worst part, it will deliver a tough game.
I have enjoyed and still enjoy this little machine, one of the best ever made by Excalibur.

Fern

[Monsieur Plastique]

As I've mentioned a few times in the past, the Deluxe Talking Touch Chess (DTTC) program is precisely the same - even down to clock speed - as the Alexandra and Phantom Force machines. There is absolutely no differences whatsoever in the actual engine and speed of these 3 machines.

I can't agree these machines are as strong as you assert, though they are clearly not weak either. Nevertheless, this DTTC program still lost a 10 game match against Mephisto Europa (40 moves in 2 hours with all games played out to mate) by 8.5 to 1.5. I have also played many games against these machines myself over the years and they have only a slightly better score against me than the DTCC achieved against Europa.

I think the ratings you have read of around 1650 are the more accurate ones or at least the ones that stand a test of plausibility, though if you were to try and rate it according to the "old" SSDF listing (where something like a Mephisto Miami / Advanced travel was 1897), then I think the DTTC would fall somewhere around the low 1600s mark on that same scale. I do agree with you, however, that it's endgame is at a higher level than comparably rated devices, though that is offset by rather aimless strategic and positional play relative to those same comparable devices (in my opinion).

Still, the DTTC appeared to be a rare example of excellent engineering from a company that seemed to specialise in very cheap plastic devices - it had the same sort of build quality and attention to detail that machines such as the Scisys ones had in the early 80s.

[Fernando]

As I've mentioned a few times in the past, the Deluxe Talking Touch Chess (DTTC) program is precisely the same - even down to clock speed - as the Alexandra and Phantom Force machines. There is absolutely no differences whatsoever in the actual engine and speed of these 3 machines.

I can't agree these machines are as strong as you assert, though they are clearly not weak either. Nevertheless, this DTTC program still lost a 10 game match against Mephisto Europa (40 moves in 2 hours with all games played out to mate) by 8.5 to 1.5. I have also played many games against these machines myself over the years and they have only a slightly better score against me than the DTCC achieved against Europa.

I think the ratings you have read of around 1650 are the more accurate ones or at least the ones that stand a test of plausibility, though if you were to try and rate it according to the "old" SSDF listing (where something like a Mephisto Miami / Advanced travel was 1897), then I think the DTTC would fall somewhere around the low 1600s mark on that same scale. I do agree with you, however, that it's endgame is at a higher level than comparably rated devices, though that is offset by rather aimless strategic and positional play relative to those same comparable devices (in my opinion).

Still, the DTTC appeared to be a rare example of excellent engineering from a company that seemed to specialize in very cheap plastic devices - it had the same sort of build quality and attention to detail that machines such as the Scisys ones had in the early 80s.

Very probably, Monsieur Plastique, you are right. It happens that after a game you have lost or just draw, as was my case, you finish the game with a higher sensation about the machines capabilities and the same, in reverse, happens if you win.
In any case, as you say, it was a very well made little machine and I enjoy to play it because the readability of the screen AND the long duration of battery life. With tablets you can rune very much better engines, but energy goes so fast you sometimes has no time to end the game.

Fern