Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 22:40:32 10/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 2000 at 00:15:30, Ratko V Tomic wrote:
>> Now I understand better what Chris Whittington calls "the Hyatt paradigm". :)
>
>> I'm sorry, I never thought I would one day share CW's point of view,
>> but you are pushing me in that direction...
>>
>> Gambit Tiger was not certain that 43.Rc6 was winning. Actually it might
>> even turn out that this move is incorrect. I don't know.
>>
>> And you know what? I DON'T CARE.
>
>Few threads back you mentioned how you don't think that a successful attack
>requires objective advantage. I was puzzled by that seemingly "anti-scientific"
>statement, but your comment above clarifies it nicely. As long as you're playing
>against imperfect opponents, Gambit Tiger (or CST) will, under the right
>circumstances, make a move which unbalances the position, with objectively
>unclear outcome, hoping it knows better how to work within the particular kind
>of imbalance, e.g. with kingside attack. If GT has a very good knowledge and
>fast algorithms for the king-side attacks, it stears the game to such positions,
>even though the conventional truncated minimax may be telling it it isn't a good
>idea.
That's right.
Don't forget also that Chess Tiger is able to compute very deep, often deeper
than its computer opponents.
What do I do with all this tactical power if I only play quiet positions?
>So, GT is drawing an opponent into a kind of position it confident it can
>compute better than its opponent. It is like a small guerrilla force drawing the
>larger conventional army into the kind of terrain which nullifies the advantage
>in firepower or manpower. Since the current anti-computer strategies do show
>that most programs don't judge well the dangers of king-side attacks, the GT
>concentrates on strengthening its computation/knowledge in that type of
>position, hoping it can do it better than a more conventional program,
>regardless of what the "objective" value of its position may be.
It's not only about taking advantage of the opponent's ignorance, but that is
certainly playing a role at this time.
Christophe
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.