Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Adding new book lines to Crafty

Author: Colin Frayn

Date: 03:57:34 03/10/00

Go up one level in this thread


On March 09, 2000 at 22:11:22, Mark Longridge wrote:

>It seems that my book has a few major holes, particularly with the Evans
>Gambit and King's Gambit. What is the best way to add new lines to crafty's
>book?

I've found that a lot of good programs have problems when playing black in the
King's gambit accepted.  I also got an easy win with ColChess against SSEChess
the other day playing the Evans gambit.  I think few programs are ready primed
to cope with playing black against such strategies, though most (especially
Crafty, as I have found) seem more than capable of playing white.

>All I did to make my book was medium with all of Kasparov's games and
>RJF's games. But I'm thinking adding more human games may not be the best
>for crafty. Perhaps a better "computer" book could be devised.

Try studying as many games as possible of Paul Morphy.  He seems extremely good
at playing both these lines (and I presume that's because he knew how to defend
them as well).

>And I'm still not convinced that some sort of Monte Carlo analysis wouldn't
>greatly benefit crafty's endgame. Especially if you used the endgames
>typically reached in actual computer verus computer, and computer versus
>strong human player.

How do you intend to apply Monte Carlo techniques to endgame play?

>Idle computer time could be used to generate an analysis of the targetted
>end games. Then, when logging onto FICS or whatever, the new endgame
>data will improve crafty's game long before the TB's come into effect.

So you're suggesting a sort of 'endgame book' rather like endgame table bases?
I think you'll find that the number of positions reached in typical endgames
becomes prohibitively large.  I know that openings are often very similar, or
transpose into the same positions, but the same is not true for endgames.  To
get better endgame play, you really need to work on the static analysis function
as there is rarely any chance of detecting variations deep enough otherwise.

Cheers,
Col



This page took 0.03 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.