Author: Jeroen Noomen
Date: 12:32:51 07/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2000 at 13:51:41, Jorge Pichard wrote: >1a. A piece does not have to be developped to be considered dangerous on the > Queen's side or King's side of the board, the point in case here, is > weather to Castle so soon on one side or the other without realizing the > future potential of those pieces located on the same side of the castled > King. Once again: How to count that? If they are not developped and harmless, why not castle? If these undevelopped pieces cannot be developped, why should not you castle? This completely depends upon the position. And how do you define 'potentially dangerous'? You are a genius if you can make some source code out of this! >2a. Therefore, a subroutine would be very helpful on the earlier stage of the > openings, where the center is closed. When a computer program play against > a GM, it should not play the same opening so blindly as a human. what is a > good opening for a human is not always a good opening for a computer. Easier said than done. What kind of subroutine? How to define in program code 'don't play the opening so blindly as a human'? The human ability is to get an opening on the board that suits him and is bad for the opponent. Compuers only have their opening book and primitive rules for opening play. Unfortunately these do not work in blocked positions. Jeroen
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.