Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Assumptions of fallibility/infallibility

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 05:39:29 04/03/00

Go up one level in this thread


On April 03, 2000 at 07:35:44, guy haworth wrote:

>
>An interesting situation!
>
>On the one hand, if you assume that your opponent is infallible (e.g. HAS the
>EGT), you will want to avoid the EGT situation.
>
>On the other hand, if you assume that your opponent might be fallible (i.e. does
>not have the EGT) you could go - as you did with the hard-to-win 'EGT' situation
>in preference to the other.
>
>If an 'infallible opponent' would also win the non-EGT situation, maybe it is a
>'no brainer' situation but certainly one where you have to override the
>computer's automatic avoidance of lost EGT-positions.
>
>Guy H

It isn't a "tablebase problem".  How many times have you seen a computer go
toward a longer mate, but one that is easier for a human to see?  The search
assumes optimal play by both sides...  tablebase or long forced mate...




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.