Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:03:34 10/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 04, 2000 at 11:44:15, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On October 04, 2000 at 10:22:10, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 04, 2000 at 07:54:00, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >> >>>On October 03, 2000 at 18:18:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On October 03, 2000 at 12:34:11, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 03, 2000 at 11:58:05, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 02, 2000 at 13:54:23, Mike Adams wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>The move that my freind said crafty considered was the pawn takes knight move >>>>>>>toward the end. Knight takes bishop earlier wreked the positon and i dont think >>>>>>>pulsar would get itself into that kind of postion again with the current >>>>>>>evaluate. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>taking the knight isn't particularly bad. NxB opens a file against your own >>>>>>king. PxN (I assume that is the knight you are talking about taking) is a >>>>>>reasonable move for white. He wants that open file. >>>>> >>>>>Mike did not mean to that knight. >>>>> >>>>>He meant to taking the knight by gxf3 in the following line >>>>> >>>>>[D]r1bq1rk1/ppp2p2/2n4p/3pP1pn/3P4/2P2NB1/P1P1B1PP/R2QK2R b KQ - 0 14 >>>>> >>>>>Nxg3 hxg3 g4???? Qd2 gxf3???? >>>>> >>>>>avoiding gxf3 is a simple tactics. >>>>>Crafty17.11 can see at depth 7 that gxf3 is bad. >>>>> >>>>>The bigger problem is to avoid g4 and crafty17.11 needs depth 9 for it. >>>>> >>>>>Fritz5.32 can avoid gxf3 at depth 5 and it can avoid g4 also at depth 5. >>>>> >>>>>Hiarcs4 can avoid gxf3 at depth 3. >>>>>Faile 1.4.4 can avoid gxf3 at depth 6. >>>>>CometB02 can avoid gxf3 at depth 5. >>>>> >>>>>All these programs that are not the best programs need few seconds or less than >>>>>1 second on a slow hardware to avoid gxf3. >>>>> >>>>>I think that you need to improve the tactical ability of your program and >>>>>working on positional knowledge is less important. >>>>> >>>>>Chess is a tactical game. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>Yes... but the tactical ability improves automatically. You should try it on >>>>my quad xeon. It fries tactical things there. :) >>> >>>Crafty is a good program, but perhaps the way you should be looking at this is >>>maybe you would write a better program if you were running on slower hardware. >>>Fast hardware can cover up a lot of deficiencies of a program as you have >>>essentially pointed out. >> >>Why design for obsolete hardware? Within a year or two everybody will be on >>hardware faster than my quad xeon (which is probably about the speed of a >>1.5ghz machine or so). With only so many hours available for working on Crafty, >>spending time on the parts that new hardware won't fix makes more sense, IMHO. > >I'm sure there is some truth to what you are saying, but if Crafty needs to >search to a greater depth to find the same tactics, isn't that a sign of some >type of inefficiency? Not to me. The issue is whether it finds it or not when playing a game. Not whether it needs a 10 ply or 12 ply to find it...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.