Author: Chessfun
Date: 11:47:55 10/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2000 at 14:38:52, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>I meant it's dead even after Rc6. > > > >That's what I understood. > >If it is dead even after Rc6, then this move is highly justified. > >It offers opportunities to white, and as it is dead even white is not taking >risks himself. > >Instead, black can reach a position where it takes a too deep search in order to >find the refutation, and lose. > >That's probably what happened (I'm not even pretending that Rc6 was correct), >and white won. Myself I view the how correct the move is simply by the result. Analysis can take place that may or may not prove the sac to be unsound however even that changes, as the game Fischer v Botvinik proved with the later analysis of Kasparov. The natural conclusion to me is if you see your program playing these moves and losing more than it is winning adjustments need to be made to how it scores. Hopefully within a couple of months the SSDF will have tested both Tiger 13.0 and Gambit 1.0 and it will be seen how strong these moves are. Sarah.
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.