Author: Peter Berger
Date: 07:09:33 09/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 2004 at 07:19:24, martin fierz wrote: >however, with humans just as with computers, that is just "masking" your >inability to come to grips with certain positions (e.g. the queen-pawn-borers >are usually tactically weak), and if you want to improve, you should rather try >to get comfortable in other positions too rather than trying to avoid them - you >(or your program) will become a more all-round player which is never wrong... >you can always go back to limiting your repertoire if it doesn't work out. > Agreed. I also think that when your program has many troubles with a line other computer players excel in, it shows areas to improve. E.g. the Najdorf often is mainly about tactics and king safety. When you choose to avoid the line, the principal problem still stays. Of course there are also practical considerations e.g. time availlable for book preparation, same as with human masters, but usually avoiding playing the sharpest and critical lines, especially with black, means much lower chances to play for a win. Peter
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.