Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:00:31 02/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2001 at 13:10:14, John Hatcher 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? > >There is a "chess" reason for this, quite apart from any computer reason. If >players castle on opposite sides (one King-side, one Queen-side) the chances of >losing AND of winning go up. Opposite side castling creates a sharp, tactical >position with violent pawn storms and piece attacks. That's true for humans and >for computers. > >John In comp-comp games, these games are mostly won by the side with better knowledge about attacking/pawn storming. In human-comp games, these games are most often won by the human. I wouldn't even _think_ about castling opposite against a good GM if I didn't think my book was deep enough and wide enough to get the attack well under way before the book fails.
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.