Author: James Robertson
Date: 02:01:55 06/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 1999 at 04:50:50, Rodney Topor wrote: >I'm a weak chess player, so please excuse me if this post doesn't make sense. >I'm just seeking information and opinion. > >When I read annotated master-level games, particularly in texts, I see many >references to plans that players make (preparing to open a file, preparing to >double rooks on the seventh rank, preparing a pawn storm against the enemy king, >preparing a bishop sacrifice on h7, forming a blocked pawn structure, etc.). > >When I watch programs play each other at WCCC99, e.g., I get the impression that >these very strong programs follow opening books, move pieces to good squares, >use search to find and exploit tactical opportunities, and eventually rely on >EGTBs. That is basically how they work. :) > >This leads me to the following questions: > >Do any of these programs form plans at all in the above sense? Plans that do >not require them to reconstruct (and extend) the plan after every move? > >If they don't form such plans, does this detract from the quality of their play? Yes. Computers are nightmares strategically. > (I understand that any time required for analysis and formation of plans would >reduce the time available for search.) Computers form "plans" in that they think stuff like "A rook on an open file is worth .2 pawns, so I'll move my queen in and chase away his rook, and then I can put my rook on the open file." > >Even if the lack of plans does not detract from the objective quality of their >play, does it detract from the aesthetic quality of their play? For me, it does exactly the opposite. :) Lack of "plans" reduces their strength, but not the aesthetic value. :) James > >Rodney Topor
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.