Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 13:33:34 11/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 2000 at 15:05:55, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On November 22, 2000 at 12:30:31, Fernando Villegas wrote: >>OK, Jim, but you must concur with me that B+N mate is not just one problem >>between many, but a clasic kind of position every current program must solve and >>every tester must look at as a matter of fact. The same with: >>a) king + pawn againts King >>b) King + Rook againts King >>c) King+ pawn in the h or a file >>d) oposition rule >>e) king +queen against king +rook >>... And maybe some more. I think that these kind of situations should be tested >>as a minimal test of proficiency. Should be kind of a rule of testing >>operations. >>Regards >>fernando > >in those times of dedicated chess computers we tested these stuff, >but since programs use tablebases the "testing" concerning endgame >is old-fashioned. not if the program uses NO tablebase, as we now >have learned again. > >you are right fernando. it was our mistake... >and now ? big deal ? >as i told you, i think christophe will make a new engine, >lex/ed will put it on the server and the customer gets an upgrade... No, no big deal. But certainly hurt a little our faith in the human race :-) Fernando
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.