Author: Andrew Dados
Date: 14:25:09 06/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 12, 2000 at 16:51:27, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On June 12, 2000 at 15:47:04, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>Then you haven't been following these threads very carefully. I've read a ton of >>threads about how computers cheat and behave illegally. > >I'm not quite sure of that. I think the use of words like cheat and illegality >of behaviour are your enterpretation of the discussions. Therefore not entirely >objective IMHO. > >>It's obviously not too difficult for a program to play w/o a book or databases. >>Most chess software that I've used gives you the option of turning these off. >> >>As for the program playing "on its own," well, all programs play on their own, >>even if they are using an opening book. You ask the program for a move and it >>gives you one, on its own. I don't see the problem. > >No, that is obviously true of just about every program, but it's also a question >about the strength difference of a program with and without book. It just seems >like there's a trend to jump the fence at every opportunity. Something like: "I >can't make the program play decent opening moves so I'll add an opening book". >Or: "It's losing most of the endgames let's try TB's". Fortunately, there isn't, >AFAIK, a way around avoiding the middle game. Otherwise that would have been >eliminated too. > >Best wishes... >Mogens Humans have great ability to memorize patterns (see Fernandos chat with Karpov); comps are superior in memorizing exact things, like positions. Why should we take away comp best ability? To mimic humans? I see no point in taking away opening book from program. It is a part of every chess players' knowledge (including humans), anyway. -Andrew-
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.