Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:08:04 11/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 05, 2000 at 14:09:12, Andrew Williams wrote:
>On November 05, 2000 at 13:31:22, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>
>>On November 05, 2000 at 11:57:26, Andrew Williams wrote:
>>[D] rn1q1rk1/6bp/p2p4/1p1Pp2n/6b1/2NBB3/PP1QN2P/2KR3R w - - 0 16
>>
>>thank you for the position.
>>
>>>I'm afraid my program isn't famous, but here is its output. It never
>>>considers that Black is better, although the score is falling as it
>>>gets deeper. I think I'll run this overnight and see what happens.
>>
>>
>>yes. the thing is not to find the move. the thing is:
>>how to evaluate the position !
>>draw ? winning for white ?
>>better for black ?
>>how to evaluate positions where there is no material win !
>>
>>> 1= 54 0 188 16. Rdf1 Rxf1 17. Rxf1
>>> 2= 54 0 252 16. Rdf1 Rxf1 17. Rxf1 Bxe2 18. Nxe2
>>> 3= 31 0 804 16. Qc2 Nf6
>>> 4= 55 0 2228 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1
>>> 5= 35 0 8550 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1 Nbd7
>>> 6= 58 1 40623 16. Rhg1 Bf5 17. Bg5 Qe8 18. Bh6
>>> 7= 39 5 181115 16. Rhg1 Bf5 17. Bh6 Qh4 18. Bxf5 Rxf5 19. Qc2
>>> 8= 39 19 476616 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1 Bf3 18. Bh6 Bxh1 19. Rxg7
>>> 9= 38 59 1706262 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1 b4 18. Bg5 h5 19. Bh7 Kh8 20.
>>>Bxf6
>>>10= 24 417 12520722 16. Rhg1 Qd7 17. Qc2 Bf5 18. Bh6 Bxd3 19. Rxd3
>>
>>the score is 0.24 ?
>
>Correct. At depth 10, score is +0.24 for White after 417 seconds. The last
>number is the number of nodes.
>
>
>Andrew
>
>>
>>>This is on a K6-2 300 which was a bit busy doing other things too. I can't
>>>comment on your views below, but one thing I will say is that PM would get
>>>crushed in a straight match against Fritz, Shredder, Junior or Hiarcs. And
>>>Gambit Tiger as well :-)
>>
>>
>>right. you can reach lots of elo when you forget about chess and just
>>count the pieces and search very deep. you can even outsearch
>>more intelligent programs. but is this chess ?
>>
>>the position above is IMO about chess.
>>its not to find the move. its to see in move 16, better in move 14,
>>that white is better and black cannot defend much longer.
>>
>>
>>i am not saying: ANY program that finds the move Rhg1 is a new-paradigm
>>program.
>>
>>but i am saying that programs of the new paradigm find out that white is better
>>and has winning chances.
>>
>>Thats what gandalf, cstal and most of all 3, gambit-tiger evaluates here.
>>
>>the new paradigm is not about FINDING key moves. Thats not playing chess.
>>it is cross-word. is cross-word-puzzle-solving beeing intelligent ? no.
>>
>>the new paradigm is not about finding key moves in positions that HAVE
>>a solution. the new paradigm is about finding a plan and evaluating
>>it as a chance in a position that is NOT solved.
>>
>>you see the difference ?
>>
>>A bednorz-toennissen test-suite has 30 positions, and the programs
>>havwe to find the key moves. its bean counting.
>>the positions are all won ! the key move is there !
>>thats not chess, its solving cross-word-puzzles.
>>
>>the differenciation is not WHICH PROGRAM finds the moves.
>>there is nothing to find. you have to invent something. therefore
>>you have to evaluate for it.
>>otherwise you won't follow the idea, or ?
>>
>>imagine you have fritz and you think: oh- the position is draw, slightly
>>better for black. and then you lose the game.
>>brilliant, isn't it ??
Minor eval changes (commands any user can type directly into crafty) will
yield this:
5 0.35 -- 1. Rdg1
5 0.40 4.17 1. Rdg1 Bf3 2. Bg5 Qc7 3. Bxh7+ Kxh7
5 0.64 ++ 1. Rhg1!!
5 0.74 4.72 1. Rhg1 Bf3 2. Rdf1 Qc7 3. Bxh7+ Kxh7
5-> 0.88 4.72 1. Rhg1 Bf3 2. Rdf1 Qc7 3. Bxh7+ Kxh7
6 1.15 4.61 1. Rhg1 Nf6 2. Bh6 Ra7 3. Bxh7+ Kxh7
4. Bxg7 Rxg7
6-> 1.40 4.61 1. Rhg1 Nf6 2. Bh6 Ra7 3. Bxh7+ Kxh7
4. Bxg7 Rxg7
7 1.85 ++ 1. Rhg1!!
7-> 4.66 5.00 1. Rhg1 Nf6 2. Bh6 Ra7 3. Bxh7+ Kxh7
4. Bxg7 Rxg7
8 7.20 5.35 1. Rhg1 Qc8 2. Bh6 e4 3. Bxe4 Re8 4.
Rxg4 Qxg4
8-> 13.21 5.35 1. Rhg1 Qc8 2. Bh6 e4 3. Bxe4 Re8 4.
Rxg4 Qxg4
9 25.25 5.23 1. Rhg1 Qc8 2. Bh6 Rf4 3. Bxg7 Nxg7
4. Nxf4 Bxd1 5. Ne6 Nc6
9-> 31.06 5.23 1. Rhg1 Qc8 2. Bh6 Rf4 3. Bxg7 Nxg7
4. Nxf4 Bxd1 5. Ne6 Nc6
Which shows what your position proves. Namely nothing. The first issue is
to _play_ the right move. Whether your eval is overly optimistic or overly
pessimistic doesn't really matter, in this position...
There is no "new" paradigm...
That is just a buzz-word...
This page took 0.01 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.