Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 11:47:33 04/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 06, 2001 at 14:09:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 06, 2001 at 12:34:57, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On April 06, 2001 at 11:49:27, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >> >>>Since nobody is posting wins of my program, I mayself have to do it. -:) >>> >>>Having got curious on Gambit Tiger, I have made 2 consecutive games on FICS, >>>comet even running on a bit inferior hardware (700 MHZ - 1 GHz, time control is >>>4+6.) >>>The games below demonstrate the high risk of gambit tiger's playing style. I can >>>hardly imagine a top engine giving this good chances to a middle class freeware >>>program. >>> >>>The games ended 1.5 - 0.5 for comet, where tiger rather luckily escaped into a >>>drawn ending in 2nd game. >>> >>>These 2 games do of course not imply that comet is stronger. I'm sure, that the >>>ship will sink in a multi-game match. However, they do demonstrate that far >>>weaker opponents have a unexpectedly good chance against due to tiger's risky >>>playing style. >>> >>>I personally doubt that the gambit version of the program can do better than the >>>usual tiger against computer opponents. >>> >>>Regards, Uli >> >>i cannot speak for gambit-tiger2 so far, >>but i can guaranty you that for gambit-tiger1 in relation to rebel-tiger13 >>the success is on gambit-tigers side. >> >>i think the explanation is easy ! >> >>gambit-tiger will lose a few games due to risky style. >>but it will not lose as much games due to doing nothing as >>rebel-tiger13 will do. >> >>if you have 2 similar programs, and the one is more agressive, >>the more aggressive will IMO make a better score over all. > > >I totally disagree. I will be happy to give you an immensely aggressive >version of Crafty. But I believe it will lose _way_ more than it wins when >compared to the normal version. There is aggression, and there is "aggression". >and too much of _anything_ is not a good thing. > > > >> >>if you have a strong chess program, that is not trying to get the initiative >>or is doing almost nothing than waiting for opponent mistakes, >>it will not be very strong. > > >If a program tries _too_ hard to be aggressive, the passive program can safely >sit back and wait for the aggressive version to fall apart. At that point, the >only question is "What has the aggressive program given up to this point?" If >it is a positional weakness, it might not be critical. If it was a piece for >a pawn and dangerous attack, and the attack doesn't work, it will most likely >lose. > > > >> >>the reason fritz and junior do get high scores in schweden is not because these >>programs DO something. but because of book-learning effects and >>outsearching the opponent. >>but if they would have to play against itself, and ONE engine would be >>a little more DOING something, the one that tries to get the initiative >>would IMO win. > > >Initiative is one thing. uncontrolled aggression is something else. I haven't >broached the tiger aggression issue in a good while, because it didn't lead >anywhere. But Uli has a point. When I used to play in our local chess club >a lot, I found myself able to beat 1700 players almost at will. Unless I >decided that "I am going to attack and I don't care what he does to try to stop >it..." When I played like that, I found myself losing more than I expected. > >Aggression is ok, but too much is very likely worse than not enough. >Particularly if you can't out-search your opponent which lets him "call your >bluff and stuff it." I have seen the Kasparov2 (Chessmastergambit seldom make positional mistakes to my point of vieuw the mistakes I found in Gambit tiger 2 are these of mobilety I have already seen it make a quick c5 move in a kingsindian averbach Na6 line where it had a weaknes on d6 for the rest of the game it also did not found out how to contineu the fight in a meraner when it was out of book It did not search for a way to conect the 2 rooks and did get pushed a way slowly versus Chessmaster8000 Talking about Chessmaster 8000 I could make all personeletys of chessmaster play stronger then Chessmaster (Though I tried to improve it in the same way as the other personelty's}
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.