Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 07:49:41 10/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2000 at 10:44:25, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On October 15, 2000 at 10:38:46, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>Obviously, but you misunderstand. Tiger 13 and Gambit 1 are contemporary. Tiger >>beats Gambit. Now, why. >> >>Enrique > >cause gambit-tiger risks something. Gambit "risks something" against others too, and wins. Not with Tiger. > tiger not. >but when you do not risk, you can only win when the opponent makes mistakes. >so when tiger wins against gambit-tiger, it does not tell you >that tiger will win against all others. >because others do maybe not only wait and blunder, they will maybe >also attack tiger or get the initiative. >and tiger will lose. > >i see no problem here. gambit tiger is stronger. and it may lose to tiger, >and ? >tiger is not stronger than gambit-tiger. Careful: you are going down the path of bean-counting... :) >whats your problem. its very normal. I don't have a problem. Gambit does. With Tiger. >the confusion comes because you believe tiger must be stronger when beating >gambit-tiger. but - thats only ONE opponent. No, no. Read again. Gambit is very succesful against programs with weak king safety code, but much less against the others and loses to its brother Tiger. What does this tell you regarding what must be improved in it. Enrique
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.