Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:12:10 02/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2001 at 21:39:15, Christophe Theron wrote: >On February 19, 2001 at 18:38:35, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 19, 2001 at 18:17:58, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>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; >>> >>> >>>That's right. Human players are able to see very quickly that the position of >>>the king is unsafe, even if the pawn shelter is perfectly fine and there are no >>>open lines directed to the king. They know (by exerience) that the position of >>>the king is going to get really bad later. >>> >>> >>> >>>>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. >>> >>> >>>That's right, but on the other hand many programs already know that in case of >>>opposite castle it is important to start a pawn storm immediately. >>> >>>On the other hand many program are really good at launching a pawn storm that >>>end up in a blocked pawn position in front of the opponent's castle, which >>>actually protects the opponent's king from ANY attack. Really funny, and I would >>>not bet my own program is able to avoid this problem. >>> >>> >>> >>>>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. >>> >>> >>>Yes, absolutely. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >> >>A good test is a position where white plays h6, black refuses to play g6 to >>create the hole at g6 for a white queen (mate), and then white plays hxg7 and >>is quite happy. While he just put a solid wall of granite up on the g-file >>since white can't capture his own pawn and black won't do it until the time is >>right. > > >Yes. I remember a long time ago I have seen that Genius (3 or 5) was able to >understand this. I have been very impressed (I have actually been impressed by >Genius at least a thousand of times). Same here. :) > >However I still don't have anything for this in my own program. It does not >happen often enough to give me a good sample of test positions for this case. > > > >> The problem I see is that some programs have huge scores for open files >>on the king. Even if the opponent can plant a bishop on that file and close it >>for as long as he wants. There are open files, and there are useful open files. > > >That's right. That's another challenge for programs trying to understand king >attacks. > > > > Christophe
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.