Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:59:11 10/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2000 at 08:56:16, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On October 15, 2000 at 07:44:21, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On October 15, 2000 at 06:28:06, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >> >>>Christophe was the first to call himself a second Chris, hopefully for his >>>approach to some aspects of chess programming. >> >>indeed ! harald misunderstands me. >>he believes i want to take glory from christophe and wants to give it to >>chris. IMO i do only want to point out that without people like chris, >>we would not talk about how TAL has done it. >> >>>But I think we are forgetting Marty Hirsch. Mchess is speculative, aggressive >>>and a lot of fun, and more balanced and succesful than CST. I would relate >>>Gambit more to Mchess than to CST, and not for personal reasons. >> >>hm. of course mchess and marty are not forgotten. >>but there is a thing that is different between mchess on the one side >>and cstal/gambit-tiger on the other side. >> >>cstal and gambit-tiger follow one main-idea, very nasty way, very penetrant, >>the whole game. >>when i remember it right mchess was not that penetrant and suffered from >>changing mind concerning plans. >> >> >>>Enrique >> >>i hope marty comes back, also we dont have to forget de koning and >>others. kittinger e.g. ! >>they all gave a stone that builds the new temple ! > >Something else: > >If I like so much this kind of speculative programs it is not only as a way out >of the redundancy and boredom of do-nothing, search-is-all programs, but because >they look to me as a genuine progress in computer chess and in our ability to >enjoy it. Now I realize that I'm doing a paraphrases of something that Bruce >posted today. :) > >On the other hand (damn, there is so often another side to things), what does it >tell you the fact that Gambit loses to Tiger, while crushing programs with a >weak king-safety code? It is interesting to know if the reason is the book of tiger. Maybe playing against the book of the default tiger leads gambittiger to positions that it does not understand. It will be interesting to do a match without books and use the positions after 15 moves from the match between kasparov and kramnik as the opening positions in order to see if gambittiger continues to lose against the defaulttiger and crush Fritz or nimzo. There is a reason that I suggest these positions and not the nunn match positions because people may claim that some programs are prepared for the nunn match(I do not think that this is the case but I prefer positions when there is no doubt about it). Gambit losing against tiger may be also result of statistical illusion. What is the result between gambit and default tiger? Uri
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.