Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 01:07:13 10/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 2000 at 12:30:33, Christophe Theron wrote: >On October 19, 2000 at 02:54:31, Jason Williamson wrote: > >>On October 18, 2000 at 17:56:48, Brian Richardson wrote: >> >>>Perhaps it is missing the point, but why not just use EGTB (Endgame Tablebases). >>> The 3&4 piece sets are not that large. Then you can concentrate on early >>>endgame or other phases... >> >>Yace does use TB, but is there a problem with improving the engine's endgame >>play without it? How can it be bad. >> >>JW > > > >Anyway, you just have to add pawns on the A or H file and you cannot use TBs >anymore, when any human player can see (generally easily) if it is a draw or >not. > >These cases are not uncommon. Tiger 12 did not understand them, and the problem >has been reported to me several times. The program lost some games instead of >forcing white to double the pawns on the A or H file and get the draw. > > > > Christophe There are lots of cases that you can solve trivially, but if you then add a pawn for the weaker side, they are suddenly no longer solved. Cases in point are this KBP vs K problem, also KRN vs KR, KRB vs KR, and even in some dumb cases KN vs K and KB vs K. Just give the weaker side an extra pawn, and the weaker side has all of what few winning chances there are, yet many programs will return positive scores. KBP vs KP is a five-man problem, and I doubt most people would consider that table important. And if that is taken care of, there is still KBP vs KPP. bruce
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.