Author: blass uri
Date: 11:45:35 03/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2000 at 14:16:23, Dann Corbit wrote: >On March 17, 2000 at 04:16:41, Dave Gomboc wrote: >[snip] >>Just saw Dann's analysis with Crafty... Crafty didn't do so well. Maybe any >>helper program was newer than I thought. :/ > >I don't know. Crafty did not find the intesting move, but it parroted the moves >by two great correspondence players which I think is pretty phenomenal. I think that Nb6 was a big blunder of white and finding this move is not phenomenal. I think that the loser played worse than some computer programs like chesmaster6000(ss=10) that can avoid Nb6 after some hours. I expect every 1600 player over the board+some hours+computer to avoid Nb6 even if their program cannot see that Nb6 is losing because they can extend forced lines like Nb6 axb6 Qxa8 Bd7 Qa7 Bb5 and see the evaluation of the computer after the forced line before playing Nb6. I do not think that the level of correspondence players is very high(if you consider the fact that they have the right to use computers to help them). My experience from my correspondence games is that many correspondence players do tactical mistakes that computer programs avoid inspite of the fact that the rules let them to use a computer. 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.