Author: Georg v. Zimmermann
Date: 12:17:28 10/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 2000 at 12:38:00, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >On October 13, 2000 at 10:48:21, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 13, 2000 at 08:00:45, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On October 13, 2000 at 05:37:48, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: >>> >>>>On October 12, 2000 at 19:32:22, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 11, 2000 at 22:15:23, Daniel Chancey wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>NM DragonSlayr from chess.net claims that white has a forced win in the >>>>>>beginning of a wild 5 game. Wild 5 is the original setup of pieces, but the >>>>>>pawns are 1 square away from queening and the pieces are in front of the pawns! >>>>>> >>>>>>I'm not sure if Computers can be accurate to disprove DragonSlayr's claim. Is >>>>>>Wild 5 a win for white? >>>>>> >>>>>>Castle2000 >>>>> >>>>>the openingsadvantage is real huge. if i let diep search parallel >>>>>about an hour at the position then the score rises and rises and rises >>>>>from +1.x initially to +5.x after an hour. i can't imagine this game >>>>>is NOT won for white easily. You can directly get a huge openings >>>>>advantage. obviously 2 queens against 1 queen is a simple win and >>>>>exactly that is what you can achieve there. Now the problem is that >>>>>the branching factor gets quite huge after a few moves as queen moves >>>>>are there plenty, so you can't give 'scientific' proof that you win >>>>>easily. But a queen versus a rook already in evaluation up after a >>>>>few ply of search in the start position? >>>>> >>>>>that's clearly a game which is won by white yeah. >>>> >>>>Hello Vincent, >>>> >>>>I talked with some wild5 expert a while ago about why computers can't play it >>>>very well. It is very similar to the problems we face in crazyhouse (you know >>>>the game where you can place pieces you captured from opponent - bit like >>>>Shogi). One thing is the obvious high branching factor, another big thing is >>>>that games are much more decided by mating attacks, and sacks of whole pieces >>>>for a tempo or two are common. Now bots completely freak out when you have >>>>poseval() function which can reach +-500 pawn units (at least thats what happens >>>>to me) so they do not see that some of the good wild5 opening lines for black >>>>include a knight sack very early when it is not forced already. >>>> >>>>Wild5 might well be a win for white theoretically like normal chess might be a >>>>draw. But prove it ?! Bah. >>> >>>i think on fics diep is regurarly logged in (after the weekend again >>>changing from room now) if fics allows this type of game, try it against >>>DIEP dual. DIEP knows a few things about passed pawns and king safety >>>and checks in qsearch which makes it extremely hard to beat in this >>>kind of games. Nevertheless the openingsadvantage is so huge directly >>>that anyone who plays it for the first time is mated in 3 moves from the >>>start. >> >>I disagree. >>I am sure that every player who is not weak in tactic and seriously think about >>the game can avoid losing in 3 moves. >>The idea of mate in 3 is simple to see. >> >>The fact that there is a simple trap in the opening is not a proof of your >>theory that the advantage of white is huge. >> >>Uri > >i'm not tactical bad. i lost the first 2 games i played in wild5 before >i knew it when someone started with the right knight move. > > >i'm not claimin it's a proof. i'm just saying where we start with pawns >on second row where everything has to be proven still and things are >not settled yet, there the wild5 game is already nearly over. everything >promotes. the person who manages to promote more pieces thereby also >capturing more queens with light pieces is the winner. > >That's not a game. > >that's a joke. Chess is dead simple too, just mate your opponent. :) Every game people enjoy to play has the same right to exist, and as long as it is not solved none can be said to be easier or harder, right ? Of course I would agree with you that chess is more, lets say flexible, you have many different pawn structures with different plans etc. and therefore it has a rather unique beauty which evolved over the years. About the bet: well sorry 1.) I am a poor student :-) 2. What's the fun in betting if nothing is to win there for me ? 3. I can't play wild, I actually never played the game, just watched a few. But I will ask this friend of mine maybe he wants to play Diep some when it is loged in. Its a pleassure discussing chess programming with you, Georg
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.