Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: A test position for chess programs(Gambittiger-Tao)

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 14:00:27 10/22/00

Go up one level in this thread


On October 22, 2000 at 16:38:43, Bas Hamstra wrote:

>On October 21, 2000 at 15:24:47, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>[D]r1bqkb1r/pp1p3p/6p1/3P1pN1/3n3Q/8/PP3PPP/R1B1KB1R b KQkq - 0 1
>>The test is to avoid Nc2+ without book.
>>
>>Jeroen claimed that the problem is that Tao had no book but I suspect that the
>>problem is the fact that Tao has no king attack evaluation and if you combine
>>with the fact that Tao is weak in tactics like most of the chess programs you
>>can get the blunder.
>
>Well no big deal you say so but...
>
>a) Tao was capable of beating Quest/Fritz on 2x slower hardware
>b) Tao-Xinix (round 6) was a tactical beauty. The King (the reference) could
>hardly have mated faster here.
>
>In all, I don't think it is THAT bad tactically...

I did not say that it is bad in tactics relative to most of the programs and
most of the chess programs play Nc2+ without book.

My Junior5.9 can avoid it at 4 hours/40 moves but cannot avoid it at 3 hours/40
moves on my pentiumIII450 and Junior5.9 is better than most of the programs in
avoiding Nc2+.

I can add that when I wrote that Tao has no king attack evaluation I meant to
say no big king attack evaluation(I think that Gambittiger and chesssystemtal
are the only programs with big king attack evaluation)

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.