Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 14:34:30 11/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 23, 2000 at 14:43:57, Christophe Theron wrote: >On November 22, 2000 at 16:36:44, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>On November 22, 2000 at 14:09:59, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On November 22, 2000 at 12:30:31, Fernando Villegas wrote: >>> >>>>On November 22, 2000 at 11:51:17, James T. Walker wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hello Fernando, >>>>>I can only tell you there are many problems with all programs. None of them are >>>>>perfect. As a beta tester you can only report what you find. There are >>>>>literally hundreds of special positions which many programs do not understand. >>>>>Tablebases will cure many of these problems but not all. The programmers are >>>>>aware of many of the shortcomings of their programs. They make the decision if >>>>>it is important enough to fix or forget. I guess they only have so many hours >>>>>in a day and they have to decide what is most important at the moment. >>>>>Jim >>>> >>>>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 >>>***** >>>I agree! I remember when David Kittinger took the B+N mate info out of the >>>Forte computer (It was in it's predecessor the Super Constellation). I asked >>>him why and he said he needed the memory for something else. I never bought >>>another Novag computer after that. >>>******* >>> >>>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 >>> >>>As I said. Tablebases will fix many of these problems. I am a very strong >>>advocate of tablebases even if their contribution to rating points is minimal. >>>But I repeat, the final decision as to what a program will or will not do lies >>>with the programmer-_N_O_T_ the beta testers. Do you believe Christophe does >>>not know that Chess Tiger will not mate with a Knight & Bishop? >>>Jim >> >>I WANT to believe he just missed it. I do not want to believe he delivered us a >>so gorgeous program without THAT and with full knowledege. Like to sell a >>Mercedes without one of the wheels. >>Fernando > > > >Yes, that's exactly what I did, Fernando. > >I'm sorry, but there are other bits of knowledge that I consider as being more >essential than KBN/K, and so I started to add those other bits first. > > > > Christophe Hi! I haven't seen anyone mention another bug. Gambit don't moves at all after the opening, start thinking but never moves. I have seen it 3 times after 70-80 games. Yes the program is so exciting and fun that I can't complain at anyone of the beta-testers! The only complain against the beta-testers is that only two mentioned that the Century3 auto-player are extremely hard to get working properly.It only works well against other DOS-programs. They could also have told us that the new Century3 is an excellent program that can compete very well against the other top-programs. Bertil
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.