Author: blass uri
Date: 09:58:11 11/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 1999 at 12:41:24, Jeroen Noomen wrote: >On November 01, 1999 at 18:24:35, David Eppstein wrote: > >>Your analysis of these mistakes makes it sound like Chess Tiger is missing some >>important positional understanding. That is not something I would call luck. > >Well, it depends how you define 'luck'. From my point of view Tiger could have >scored at least 1 point better. > >Take f.e. last year's final in the Championsleague between Bayern and >Manchester. >Bayern was clearly better, had many chances to finish it off, but was punished >by two goals in the last 2 minutes. Yoy could say 'well, a game lasts 90 minutes >and so this is Bayern's own fault'. That's perfectly sensible. > >On the other hand, I think all Bayern fans will agree with me when I say 'Bayern >was very unlucky not to win the champions league'. > >As I am a Tiger fan and I know the program, I was sure it should normally win >these games. When it doesn't succeed in several games, IMO (as a fan!) it is >very unlucky. 1)I do not think that if you miss wins you are unlucky. Suppose program A is very good at the opening but not good at endgames. In this case program A is going to miss many wins but I do not think that program A is unlucky(it simply does not understand endgames). I think that a program is unlucky if it outsearched the opponent only to get a bad position that both programs understood that it is bad too late. 2)I was not convinced that tiger could win the games. I am interested to know if other programs can find the right moves and win in comp-comp games in the games that you think that tiger could do a better result. 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.