Author: Günther Simon
Date: 09:55:47 02/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2001 at 11:34:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 19, 2001 at 11:17:52, Chuck wrote: > >>On February 19, 2001 at 11:12:37, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On February 19, 2001 at 07:44:30, John Wentworth wrote: >>> >>>>This is just an observance and may be completely wrong, but it seems that when a >>>>program castles Queen side his chances of losing go up by a lot. Every time I >>>>see a program do this, I say to myself he's going to lose and I bet more than >>>>60% of the time he does. This may be a problem with humans vs humans as well, I >>>>don't know. Anyone else notice this? >>> >>> >>>I think you are right. >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>I wonder if this a problem with queen-side castling or castling opposite (one >>side castled short, one castled long)? >> >>Chuck > > >It is a problem of the following: > >1. not recognizing king safety and the danger of a pawn storm until it is >too late; > >2. not knowing how to attack the opponent, because when you castle to opposite >sides, it becomes a race to see who draws the first blood. If you don't know >how to break the position open (and I have not seen any programs do this very >well) then while the program fiddles, Rome burns. > >3. castling opposite is a direct challenge. Quite often the human will have >his pieces positioned to support his attack, while the program's pieces are >positions improperly to attack or defend. The time lost repositioning them >leads to trouble. Do you mean that yet no program evaluates king safety in a long castled position? Günther
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.