Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 00:35:12 09/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 04, 1999 at 03:25:00, Sune Larsson wrote:
>On September 04, 1999 at 02:46:52, Terry Ripple wrote:
>
>>On September 04, 1999 at 01:21:20, James Robertson wrote:
>>
>>>On September 04, 1999 at 01:03:26, Terry Ripple wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>When i run engine vrs engine matches i set it that each engine plays white and
>>>>black in each opening, this way it totally makes it more fair!
>>>>
>>>>Regards,Terry
>>>
>>>I think not. It _will_ skew the results.
>>>
>>>For instance, say you pick the King's Indian and make both programs play it. It
>>>is a very hard opening for a program to play because black accepts a big space
>>>deficit in return for a kingside attack. Most (all?) programs don't understand
>>>this and as a result white has a _big_ advantage. So if you play two games
>>>between two engines, white has a good chance of winning both, even if one engine
>>>is a lot stronger than the other. Ditto for all Gambits and even a lot of other
>>>openings that 'seem' equal (and maybe for humans are).
>>>
>>>Maybe you pick a very tactical opening, or an opening that revolves around
>>>kingside attack. Some engines are worse tactically than others, but rely on
>>>their book to avoid tactical positions. This time, instead of the games being
>>>skewed in favor of a certain color, they are skewed in favor of a certain
>>>engine.
>>>
>>>My program's book is tailored to its needs, and fits its style. To separate the
>>>two will result in a _big_ decrease in playing strength.
>>>
>>>James
>>---------
>>
>>Hi James,
>> I thought about this and i believe that you have a very good point which i
>>never really thought about! So what you are saying is if engine A should choose
>>e4 and then engine B chooses d5 (Chosen frequently by CM6000)and it now leads
>>into the Center Counter which CM6000 likes to play and now the next game i
>>force engine A with black to play that exact line of the Center Counter, then
>>this might not be tailored toward its style of play like CM6000 likes!
>> I thought the top chess engines are "tactical monsters" and that a chess game
>>is won by 99% tactics! So, are you saying that not all programmers are selecting
>>their opening books based on this because they programmed a style in to their
>>program to play more positionaly and choose closed lines of play rather than the
>>open tactical lines, perhaps because their program is not as strong a tactical
>>player?
>> I have been playing a match between Hiarcs 7.32 and Crafty 16.13 (Single CPU)
>>with a time control of 40/120 + 30/60. The match will randomly select a opening
>>and then it will play that same opening again with colors reversed. I'am using
>>the opening book of Hiarcs for both. Now i know that Hiarcs has more position
>>sense than Crafty but the opening book don't seem to be hindering Crafty in the
>>least because it's is doing quite well so far in the match. They played a total
>>of 8 games so far with a score favoring Hiarcs 5 to 3. I know this is not nearly
>>enough games to make an accurate judgement but it's a start and i'am not a
>>rating agency trying to prove who's the best but only doing this for the
>>enjoyment of playing over the games afterward and posting here for others who
>>might enjoy the games. You can still enjoy some beautiful moves from the engine
>>matches, even if they aren't optimized for their maximum strength!
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Terry
>
> Think you have some good points here,Terry! As for autoplaying - "I'm not
> a rating agency" - "doing this for the enjoyment of playing over the games
> afterward." I agree totally! And it´s a nice and entertaining way of widening
> one's understanding of chess.
>
> Regards
> Sune
Hi Sune,
Thankyou for your support, as it's nice to know that other ccc members agree
to some of these issues.
Best regards,
Terry
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.