Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:26:22 05/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2004 at 08:38:14, martin fierz wrote: >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 I think that showing how people get advantage against chess programs after g5 may be more convincing then claiming that the move is stupid without showing evidence. I did not have time to test it but comp-comp games when the programs that play g5 gets into trouble(evaluation of at least +0.5 pawn for the opponent) may be also more convincing that black's position is bad. 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.