Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:45:57 12/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 08, 2000 at 09:44:48, Uri Blass wrote: > >I do not think that the main improvement in chess program is the engine and not >the opening book. > >The problem with fisher random opening is that you get positions that usually >are not from regualr chess games and it is possible that some improvement in >regular chess is not an improvement in fisher random opening. > >For example the sides often cannot castle in random chess so knowledge about >castling cannot be used. > >I think that it is better to use random positions from practical games if you >want to test the strength of the engine without opening book. > >Of course the 2 programs should play both sides of the positions. > >I think that even playing games from positions like 1.a3 a6 is more similiar to >chess than random chess because the sides can castle and the ideas in the game >are more similiar to chess. > >Uri I thought castling was legal in _all_ "Fischer-random" layouts? IE some ways to place pieces aren't legal to make this work.
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.