Author: Gordon Rattray
Date: 08:52:17 08/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2000 at 11:35:25, Jürgen Hartmann wrote: >> >>I totally disagree. The tournament winner should be the program that plays the >>best chess. Playing the opening is part of a chess game! You can't just skip >>this phase by starting with a chosen position - that's not true chess. A good >>chess player needs to play the opening well and this should be tested during a >>game. >> >>Also, it is a big part of the "computer chess challenge" for programmers to >>decide how their program should play the opening. If someone finds a way of >>making their program play the opening better than another, this aspect should be >>taken into account, i.e. a full game of chess must be played. >> > >I think, in human chess the opening is part of the game. You e.g. need a good >memory for it. > >You correctly write "a good chess player needs to play the opening well". But in >computer chess, the player (the engine) doesn't play the opening, it is pure >file access on precompiled data. AFAIK the clocks are not even started before >the opening ends in tournament computer chess, > >Jürgen For human chess the opening is often recalled straight from memory too, and played very quickly. Opening preparation is part of chess!!! Why should it ever be left out? Surely not because some programmers have developed their engines significantly but still have weaknesses in the opening. If this was a human player they'd have to look at revising their opening repertoire, not ask their opponent to skip the opening entirely. I can't become a good chess player just by working on my middle game and end game. Gordon
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.