Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:07:16 11/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 23, 2000 at 17:34:30, Bertil Eklund wrote: >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. I think that it is old news. Ed told us many monthes ago that Rebel Century has problems with the autoplayer and the problem is going to be solved only when Rebel is going to be a windows program. > >They could also have told us that the new Century3 is an excellent program that >can compete very well against the other top-programs. It is also old news. There are results of century3 against the top programs in the rebel site. see http://www.rebel.nl/r11-rc3.htm Uri
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.