Author: Alexander Kure
Date: 06:55:54 07/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 06, 2000 at 23:41:48, Dann Corbit wrote: [...] >Another straw man! >Who said that CAP data + GM Games will create something better than years of >effort by GM players meticulously analyzing openings! What ludicrous nonesense! > >Draw yourself a circle on the ground. Make it 1 foot in diameter. We will name >this circle "6 million CAP positions" > >Now draw your circle of 3000 analyzed positions in the center of it. It is >almost surely better than the CAP answers, but how big is it? Pretty small, eh? >What happens when you step out of your teeny-tiny 3000 large circle? Shall we >just fall down and start crunching? What if (instead) we have a large database >of GM positions and CAP analysis and other data at our disposal. Maybe we can >use that information to move quickly and create time pressure for our opponent. > 1. Actually 3000 analyzed positions seems to be very small, more accurate would have been 500.000. 2. CAP data misses many analysis that has never been played, but are general book knowledge. So with all that stuff you only get what shines through the surface but everything what is in the deep ocean will be hidden ;-) >Don't trust that idea? > >How much will it cost you to analyze those 6 million positions by hand? >Next year it will be 12 million, and at higher quality. >CAP will keep marching forward. Will your hand-tuned book keep up? >I doubt it. You will run out of money or energy or both. > >>It sure is better to have something instead of nothing, but we all >>already have something and that something are a lot of books and analyzes. > >How long will it take you to flawlessly convert those books into Computer >readable format? And if you did that, you could still use CAP data (or not) to >increase your probablility of making the right choice. Greetings Alex
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.