Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:31:27 02/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 23, 2004 at 15:13:35, Claude Le Page wrote: >Hi Robert! >I don't agree : at any time control , it's quite possible that the best >tactician engines choose completely different ways : for instance in Schmidt >attack of Traxler : 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 Bc5 5 Bxf7+ Ke7 6 b4 , >some engines choose 6...Nxb4 , others Bxb4 , or Bd4 , or at last 6...Bxf2+ , and >all lead to quite different continuations , very different but of similar >value: there would be more consensus in a "steady" position >Friendly Yours >Claude Le Page Our definition of "tactical" is way different. By tactical, I am thinking of positions like (say) WAC 141 or other such positions where things are pretty forced and directly solvable by search. In non-tactical positions, engines vary a lot, one pushes a pawn, one moves a piece, one plays Kh1 and does nothing at all. The tactical position you are talking about is way too deep, which lets the programs vary all over the place and perhaps win (or not) in many different ways... There it is more of a positional guess as to which move they will play if they can't see all the tactics...
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.