Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 04:35:40 10/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2000 at 04:04:05, Bruce Moreland wrote: Thank you for your attention. first: it was not my idea to insult somebody (whom ?!) but to keep the track on the thing i have seen, because jeroen put my nose into it. >I think you work too hard to draw an artificial distinction. really. hm. i thought that these kind of moves played by chess programs are rare. imo tiger gives the rook against the knight to get a more active king-attack. no big deal. >First, I like the sacrifices that CST comes up with. It takes a plain position >and turns it into a tactical mess via a startling sacrifice or series of >sacrifices. Sometimes it is wrong and loses, other times it is right and wins. right. it drives directly into un-quiet-positions. it knows: i can see better in fog/mud of a king-attack, therefore i drive into the fog, so the opponent cannot see anything. of course cstal is not that strong as tiger is. when we began changing chris' evaluation function, the program was not that strong. and also cstal is only making less NPS. but tiger is a different animal. >I think it is a mistake to get hung up about the possibility that it will make a >mistake, and I want to make sure that I am not coming down on that side. > >It plays like its namesake, and what could be better than that? right. >Especially if the target opponent is human. If someone wouldn't be delighted to >have a computer program do that kind of thing against them, they need to go play >checkers or something. right. but isn't this was the most chess programs DO ? playing checkers ? they sit arround, wait until the opponent has made a mistake. and then they take this advantage/material and smile. i know ferret is different. i remember when ferret attacked fritz in paderborn, and fritz had no idea what is happening to it. it evaluated famous 0.00 or arround 0.00 and ferrets score increased. and when the attack was there, when it saw the stuff, it was too late. that was cool bruce. we all have to thank you that you pushed fritz out of the contest :-)) > This kind of thing should amuse you greatly (I don't >think that programs do this enough), stretch your defensive resources (which >programs don't tend to do very much at all), and give you ideas about how to do >that kind of thing yourself (which programs don't tend to do at all). > >If the target opponent is a computer, it sort of depends upon what your goal is. > If you don't want to lose, this is probably not the best way to play. I have >to believe that some of these sacrifices can be defended easily, causing the >program to "lose chanceless", as Vincent would say. > >So I hope that I have indicated to you that I am a CST fan, even though I am not >a fan of Chris' personal behavior. I hope that I have also indicated that I >don't think that boring chess is the best chess. yes yes yes. i will not attack you bruce. you "indicated" to be a friend :-)) i have the same feelings towards CSTal. it makes fun. i am sure ferret plays also not that boring. but only YOU know since we don't have the chance to see ferret play that often. >I think though that this kind of stuff can be challenged and explored without >pooping the party completely. :-)))) yes. >In my opinion it is not enough to play this kind of thing. There should be some >sense behind it, and if anything is to be applauded as a brilliancy, there >should be something substantial behind it. right. >I suppose it comes down to whether the program knows anything here other than >that it wants to open lines, get passed pawns, and win a pawn or two for the >exchange? and it needs the courage of the programmer to particpate with such a weird version into an important tournament (french-championship), dutch-open) >A couple of points. right. >It is unlikely that a program will refuse the sacrifice, but I wonder what >happens if one chooses to do so. Superficially black seems to be fine to let it >sit there. >Assuming that the sacrifice is accepted, 45. a5 seems easy to find, but I wonder >what would have happened had black tried to keep lines closed with 45. ... b5, >which is also possible for a program to find. it could answer 45..b5 with 46.Qb4 (+1.40) main-line: 46...Rd5 47.a6 Qf6 48.Qc3 Qe6 49.Rc1 Qc8 50.Qb3 Rxc6 51.Qxd5 Rxc1 52.Qxe5+ Ka8 53.Qxb5 Rc6 54.Bd4 Rxa6 computed on a k6-400. feel free to change a black move where you want. >bruce p.s.: in the last 14 days i have seen gambit-tiger play many games. i have also seen a match against commercial shredder4 on my machines, that was very very cool: 11.5 - 2.5 (+10 -1 =3) for gambit-tiger (autoplayed 60/60 games on k6-400). I never posted those games, others did post their games, i decided not to do it, because the people should IMO be informed about when the product is available, not before. this will be named as propaganda/hype. i am sure shredder5 will be stronger, but nevertheless this result made me very surprised to the coming days when shredder5, gambit-tiger and other new programs have been released. Maybe i do start a new tournament with all of them. maybe my christmas-tournament. but i am looking forward to let them all play together. in november i hope to get my flatrate !! than i can play online-chess ! and we will maybe talk to each other more often. this will be great bruce ! see you !
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.