Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 02:12:13 08/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 30, 2000 at 04:47:49, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 30, 2000 at 04:34:08, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On August 30, 2000 at 02:42:49, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 30, 2000 at 00:31:24, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>> >>>>On August 29, 2000 at 23:19:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 29, 2000 at 19:18:17, Alexander Kure wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 29, 2000 at 13:58:52, Graham Laight wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Firstly, apologies to everyone for dashing off after the last game in the WMCCC. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It enabled me to get an extra day's holiday with my girlfriend, though, which >>>>>>>was well worthwhile! >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Well deserved, Graham! >>>>>>Thanks again for your work. >>>>>> >>>>>>[...] >>>>>> >>>>>>This game clearly showed that Fritz plays in a different league than Crafty! In >>>>>>fact I think this was one of the best games of the WMCCC. >>>>>> >>>>>>Greetings >>>>>>Alex >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>My take on this game is a bit different. I do _not_ want my program to make >>>>>such a sacrifice and then see the eval steadily go _down_ over the next few >>>>>moves. It means one of two things for it to win such a game: >>>>> >>>>>1. The eval is bogus. It is saying "this is bad" when in reality "this is >>>>>good". I don't want that sort of evaluation. >>>> >>>>But this is unavoidable. Otherwise computer programs would only need to do a 1 >>>>ply search. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>2. The program was lucky. A little luck doesn't hurt. But it doesn't win >>>>>tournaments very often. >>>> >>>>Again, unavoidable. Have crafty play against itself and you will still have >>>>decisive games. The games are won due to luck, since they have the same eval. >>>>The question is, "did Fritz make a good gamble?" >>>> >>>>> >>>>>Either the eval was wrong, or it was lucky. Neither one leave me feeling like >>>>>"fritz is in a different league than Crafty..." >>>> >>>>Of course, but that is pretty much how _all_ games are decided isn't it? >>> >>>No >>> >>>There are games when one side get advantage and slowly increase the advantage >>>without having a worse position. >> >>The only truly correct evals are a: win, draw or loss. The other stuff in >>between are _practical_ assessments that do not correspond to the true >>evaluation of the position, but they are precisely what all programs rely on in >>all games. Yes? >> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>I suspect white has better moves that might have justified the pessimistic eval >>>>>Fritz had... The right program might have made that sacrifice look as ugly as >>>>>this game made it look brilliant... >>>> >>>>Better moves may exist, but you have to _find_ them. >>> >>>Crafty could find Nxe6. >> >>If Nxe6 is an improvement for crafty, it had to find it during the game and not >>after. Why it didn't is irrelevant to the result. The result still stands. > >The result stands but the impression that fritz is a different league than >crafty does not stand. > >Uri That statement I do not have to defend, since I did not make it. It isn't necessary for the point I was making. As for the statement itself, my opinion is that it is obviously hyperbole born of enthusiasm and therefore there really is no need to make a big issue out of it.
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.