🚀 go-pugleaf

This is not intended as a flame or to denigrate those who worked on GNU Chess.
Has anyone really looked at the opening book that comes with GNU Chess?  It
is horribly biased in favor of pet openings without regard to actual chess
preference.  I am stunned at how many variations of the Vienna Opening are
out there.  Frankly, I think the opening book would be better served to be
more rounded and more in tune with actual preference.  I mean, I think 
every possible variation of the Vienna Opening is in it, and only a mere
handful of King's Indian and Benoni lines are out there.  I don't know 
anyone who plays the Vienna Opening, but there are plenty of King's Indian
and Benoni players out there.  My point is, certain openings are more popular
than others and have attracted more theory and I think a computer program's
opening book should reflect that.  I play the Pirc, but I wouldn't put
20 or 30 different variations out there just because I like the opening.  In
it's defense, the GNU Chess opening book does have a lot of Sicilian
variations, which I think it should.  Does anyone have any thoughts on the
subject?  I suppose that by being so biased toward the Vienna, it does give
GNU Chess a "personality", but would it be better served to have a more
rounded approach to an opening book?  I think so and that is why I am
seeking out the other opening books recently discussed here.  Perhaps if
enough people feel the same way, the next release of GNU Chess could have
one of these other books in it (I say this with reservations, having yet
to test any other books).
-- 
CUL8R,                                | Unknown Actor:"Sounds like a lot of 
Jason Shumate                         |   supernatural baloney to me."
System Administrator, wrdis02         | Bela Lugosi:"Supernatural, perhaps. 
jshumate@logdis1.wr.aflc.af.mil       |   Baloney, perhaps not."