Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 01:10:52 10/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 22, 2000 at 16:37:53, Uri Blass wrote: >1)I believe that the difference between Gambittiger and the default version of >tiger is the fact that Gambit has bigger positional scores. > >There is no reason for a big story to explain what happens. >The word evaluation function is enough to explain what happens. ah brilliant. than i see no reason why the others will not soon adapt and overtake tiger. ok - we will see. easy thing. just evaluation function. :-))) easy to tune... >2)I do not think that is is a new paradigm. you are free to have any different opinion, yes. >Gambittiger only have more cases of big positional scores and have them in cases >of king attack(I like it but the idea of having big positional scores is not >something new in chess programs). no - it isn't. thats true. have you seen any other chess program playing on that level like gambit-tiger in the moment with "having big positional scores" before ? it looks to me that gambit-tiger has a few elo-points more than the others. can you kill shredder 11.5 - 2.5 if you have only a few positional scores higher than others ? that would show us that the programs we had before were mistaken in having to low positional scores. i do remember very well that e.g. shredder had very high positional scores. shredder and hiarcs. i can do a battle between latest crafty and gambit-tiger with the winboard-autoplayer-system, if you want. it works pretty well so far. then we can see how different the scores are... in general...
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.