Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 12:16:26 11/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 2000 at 19:03:41, stuart taylor wrote:
>On November 14, 2000 at 02:23:42, Keith Kitson wrote:
>
>>I'm not sure where the problem lies.
>>
>>Gambit Tiger is released to show a different style of play.
>>
>>If you want better analysis use Chess Tiger 13, or even Rebel century 3 they're
>>all in the same package.
>>
>>Gambit Tiger is getting a reputation for its cavalier, edge of the seat play.
>>
>>You cannot lose with 4 chess engines in one package, for the price of one, IMHO.
>>
>>Keith
>
>That makes sense. But to play more cavalier, and be correct at the same time,
>that sounds like a very great thing. It's a much greater challenge. But it
>should also win much more, because it is much deeper chess. But if it has to be
>at the expense of breadth, then it is simply a "weak" program which comes up
>with interesting ideas.
It is obviously not a weak program.
As you know, Gambit Tiger has just won two very strong computer chess
championships, in which the strongest commercial programs were participating
too: the French Computer Championship and the Dutch Computer Championship.
In these two strong championships, Gambit Tiger finished FIRST and UNDEFEATED.
> And since the cavalier attitude makes it lose more,
>against machines, so its cavalierity is of little worth.
No this is not true. Just check the game against Nimzo 8 in the Dutch
Championship, where Gambit Tiger played a speculative sacrifice and won the
game.
> But SOMETIMES,it's
>correct which makes me extremely interested, and therefore I might be wasting
>days and nights trying to work out if it is right or wrong, because I'm that
>kind of an addict. That's what chess means to me. The harmony between truth and
>beauty.
That's what Gambit Tiger tries to offer. It is not perfect, I know. It will be
improved.
But the results so far show that it is more successful than any program that
tried this before.
Christophe
> But if I KNOW that it is right otherwise it would have never made some
>sacrifice (something you could always presume about computers-until now), then I
>wouldn't need to check if the computer is right or wrong, but would spend the
>time LEARNING from the computer etc.
>S.Taylor
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.