Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 16:32:58 05/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 2000 at 16:22:40, ujecrh wrote: >On May 20, 2000 at 13:16:29, blass uri wrote: > >> >>I believe that the main reason that the programmers of Fritz and Junior did not >>care about adding knowledge in the opening(like not getting out with the queen) >>is the fact that they know from experience that they do not play without book. >> > >I completely agree with this. > >A good example is the notion of tempo in the opening (Nimzovitsh nicely explains >this in "My system"). This is really not difficult to write some code so that >the chess program knows how to gain (or avoid a loss of) tempo in the opening >(without tactical reasons for it of course) but I know commercial programs that >do not have this kind of evaluation. They simply, for instance, move pieces >again and again if, as far as their evaluation is concerned, this is the best >move. So do humans -- q.v. John Watson's comments re: Nimzowitsch, My System, and opening tempi in Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy. >If a programmer wanted to play a better opening without any book then he would >simply add this kind of knowledge to his engine. Not difficult but also not >necessary as long as book takes care of it. > >Ujecrh Yes, though "simply" sounds a bit hand-waving-ish. ;-) Dave
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.