Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 01:11:36 02/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2001 at 03:48:09, Uri Blass wrote: Dear Uri, >On February 01, 2001 at 02:20:33, Sandro Necchi wrote: > > ><snipped> >>No, maybe I did not clearly explain what I meant. I said that a friend of mine, >>testing the program regardless of the opening book, said that it was 100 points >>better than Fritz 6a. So it was not the book making it stronger, but the engine >>being stronger. > >My impression about the engine is different. > >I used ahredder5 for a long time to analyze positions from my correspondence >games when I was in theory. >If the engine is 100 elo better than I expect it to find good moves in the >opening without opwning book. I think that to expect PCs chess programs "to make theory" is wrong. The horizon effect should create a lot of problems on this matter. it really depends on the positions. In some program A should do better than program B and viceversa. > >I found that shredder suggested me a stupid sacrifice and only after many hours >the score went down and it converge to the theory move Re1. > >Here is the opening in my correspondence game against yoav dothan(I am white) > >1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Nc3 Even if this is probably the best move, I think for Shredder 5. Bd3 should be better after some moves. I know that the program evaulation is better for Nc3, but it is important the program position understanding after some moves... Qc7 6.Be2 b5 7.0-0 Bb7 > >I gave Shredder5 to analyze this position for a long time and it needed many >hours to avoid the bad sacrifice 8.e5 >It changed it's mind to Re1 that is the theory move only after many hours. This confirms what I said before. if the position is understood by the program the program would find the correct moves easily. > >I analyzed 8.Re1 when there is an interesting line 8.Re1 b4 9.Nd5. >I can also sacrifice a pawn by 9.Na4 > >I did not get a clear consequence about the sacrifices and I decided after a >long think to play 8.a3 and not to sacrifice a pawn or a knight(the game >continued 8...Nf6 9.Qd3 d6 10.Bg5 and it is yoav to move). > >One of the reason that I decided not to sacrifice is the fact that my opponent >does not have to accept and I assume in my correspondence games that my opponent >will probably play the best move. Yes, you are correct. > >It means that if I evaluate that b4 has 50% chance to win and 50% chance to lose >my chances are smaller than 50% because I assume that my opponent will play b4 >with probability of more than 50% if it wins and will not play it with >probability of more than 50% if it loses. I agree, but what is best to play is also what will bring you to a position which will suite your style or positions where you can play at your top strenght and not only a general % score. I understand this is not easy to explain and this is why one never stops to learn... > >Uri Sandro
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.