Author: martin fierz
Date: 05:38:14 05/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2004 at 08:08:58, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 10, 2004 at 07:33:38, martin fierz wrote: > >>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 :-) > > >The rules that I use in movei are based on attack information of squares near >the king. > >only not having pawns near the king leads to only a small panelty and it is not >enough to convince movei not to play g5. which basically means that movei is rather stupid in this respect :-) cheers martin >Uri
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.