Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 09:12:50 04/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 2000 at 11:59:39, blass uri wrote: >Why do you think that a program should be capable to do it? Because that would evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of every program concerning _every_ aspect of a chess program. From a scientific point of view it would also mean that endgame evaluation algorithms could eventually siege to be developed. That would be a shame IMHO. >I see no reason to teach a program things that it knows because of tablebases. >Opening is a different story because a program can be out of book very quickly >after few moves and need to know to play there. It doesn't _know_ the tablebases, it uses them. There's a cognitive difference. >The target of the nimzo7.32's programmer was to create the best program when it >can use tablebases and not to create the best program when it cannot use >tablebases. That is the choice of the author. >By your logic Nimzo7.32 is weaker than previous versions of nimzo in the endgame >because nimzo7.32 needs tablebases to win KRK endgame when previous versions do >not need tablebases. Yes, that would be correct. Best wishes... Mogens
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.