Author: martin fierz
Date: 04:33:38 05/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2004 at 05:20:38, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 10, 2004 at 05:00:46, martin fierz wrote: > >>On May 08, 2004 at 11:51:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On May 08, 2004 at 10:50:57, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>> >>>>On May 08, 2004 at 07:18:27, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 08, 2004 at 04:34:40, Sune Fischer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>You are absulutely right. >>>>>>>>It is obvious that humans already solved chess so they know if a move is a >>>>>>>>blunder or not a blunder so you can be sure that all the question marks are >>>>>>>>correct. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It is also obvious that the number of mistakes is what decides the game so if >>>>>>>>your opponent did 2 mistakes you can let yourself to do one mistake like letting >>>>>>>>him to force mate and you are not going to lose. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>:_( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You know, Uri, I have never seen you do anything but post how other people are >>>>>>>wrong (never with any reasons of course). Many other people have noticed your >>>>>>>unending flood of negativity. It is difficult to consider this post as anything >>>>>>>other than a flame. It appears I am going to have to take off the kid gloves >>>>>>>and dispose of you. >>>>>> >>>>>>Isn't it natural to only post if you disagree? >>>>>> >>>>>>Anyway, I suspect Uri has a point. >>>>>>It's not unusual for computers to play "unatural" moves, just think of the >>>>>>Hedgehog Junior played against Kasparov. >>>>>> >>>>>>All the time the GM's were saying how strange Junior's moves were, how "it >>>>>>showed no understanding of the position" blah blah blah. >>>>>> >>>>>>So please explain why Kasparov suddenly had to fight for a draw after 10 >>>>>>questionmark moves from Junior! >>>>>> >>>>>>-S. >>>>> >>>>>I never thought this day would come - but I agree with Uri here. :-) >>>>> >>>>>Sports aren't about beautiful play. Sports are about winning. If someone is >>>>>playing ugly, and winning, then it's your sense of aesthetics which needs to be >>>>>reviewed. >>>>> >>>>>Computers have a long history of winning ugly. In the recent Fritz-Kasparov and >>>>>Junior-Kasparov matches, the machines made many many more "mistakes" (according >>>>>to human opinion) than Kasparov. But - if these mistakes aren't punished - are >>>>>they really mistakes? Is it a mistake to leave Shaq wide open for three point >>>>>shots? (Or send him to the line for "free" throws?) It's impossible to speak >>>>>about objectivity here. You can only look at the results. >>>>> >>>>>Vas >>>> >>>>Let's take a look at some of the moves the annotator didn't like: >>>> >>>>[D]r2q1rk1/pp1n1ppp/2pbpn2/3p3b/8/1P1PPNPP/PBPN1PB1/R2Q1RK1 b - - 0 10 >>>> >>>>Zappa plays the obvious 10 ...e5. Deep Blue played 10 ...h6. I won't call this >>>>a bad move, but it's clearly a pass move. >>> >>>That isn't very convincing. Did you look at _your_ PV? move 4? :) >>> >>>Order doesn't mean much to alpha/beta as it scores positions, not moves as they >>>are played. >>> >>>First impression is that h6 and e5 transpose to the _same_ position... >>> >>> >>>> >>>>1... e6-e5 2. e3-e4 Rf8-e8 3. Rf1-e1 Ra8-c8 4. a2-a4 h7-h6 5. Bb2-c3 Qd8-c7 6. >>>>a4-a5 Bd6-c5 7. Qd1-b1 >>>> = (0.25) Depth: 12/34 00:01:09.00 41299kN >>>> >>>>[D]r4rk1/pp1n1pp1/2pbpn1p/q2p3b/8/PP1PPNPP/1BPN1PB1/R3QRK1 b - - 0 12 >>>> >>>>Once again Zappa wants e5. Deep Blue played Bc7, which is a pass move at best, >>>>and I would think the bishop is actually better on D6. >>>> >>>>1... e6-e5 2. c2-c4 Qa5-a6 3. d3-d4 e5-e4 4. Nf3-h4 Ra8-e8 5. Nh4-f5 Bd6-c7 6. >>>>Ra1-c1 Nd7-b6 7. c4xd5 Nb6xd5 >>>> = (0.24) Depth: 11/32 00:00:49.38 30722kN >>> >>>Same comment. Look at your move 5. :) >>> >>>You agree with DB more than you think... >>> >>> >>>> >>>>[D]r4rk1/ppbn1pp1/2p1pn1p/q2p3b/7N/PP1PP1PP/1BPN1PB1/R3QRK1 b - - 0 13 >>>> >>>>And Zappa is still dying for e5 :) Deep Blue played g5?, which cannot be >>>>considered anything but a blunder. >>> >>>Kasparov said "this is black's only hope. Any other move simply loses. This >>>makes it a fight." >> >>which makes it pretty clear that before something already went wrong for >>black... if you have to play g5, even if it's still a fight, something is very >>wrong. >> >>cheers >> martin > >It is not clear for me. >I know that pushing pawns near the king is bad in a lot of cases but it is not >always bad and this is the reason that I do not have high scores against it. > >Uri there are instances where pushing pawns in front of your king is ok. there are others where it's not ok. they are rather easy to distinguish most of the time (some simple rules are sufficient for this) and i'm surprised that you don't understand that it's not such a great idea here... i know you are a born skeptic, but perhaps you should learn to trust people with more experience sometimes :-) i'm not going as far as vincent of course to say that "after ...g5 white wins with eyes shut". that is not true of course. but it's obvious that things aren't progressing normally here if you have to play ...g5. cheers martin
This page took 0.01 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.