Author: Oliver Roese
Date: 09:32:58 12/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 2000 at 08:48:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 14, 2000 at 07:24:04, Oliver Roese wrote: > >> >>Of course you dont want to do this against humans at _any_ time, i think. >>From my own experience in short time controls i can "tell", that an open >>position can compensate the computer a pawn, at least againtst me. >>Even in games between strong humans it is sometimes to, so this rule is not >>so ridicolous how its sound at a first glance. >>The weaker side has then so much possibilities to create threads, that the >>stronger side cannot make progress. >>It would be interesting to see if this is really so, but i dont have the >>time to check that out... >> >>Oliver >> > >I don't agree with your "at _any_ time". Humans are not a "solved problem" >yet, and they can get into positions where they have all the chances. If a >program tries so hard to blow things open, when the human controls all the >key squares, I would call this "self-immolation". > >Going down in flames is one thing. But doing it by setting yourself on fire >is something else. Personally, if i were a computer i would rather sacrifice a pawn to get him in an open fight, since these humans do not understand very much if it comes to the big things to think about. But this is only my opinion. Oliver
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.