Author: Uri Blass
Date: 00:43:26 02/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 09, 2001 at 03:25:39, David Blackman wrote: >On February 08, 2001 at 05:26:40, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>I think that the opposite is truth. >>I remember that I read that chinook won against the world champion in this game >>before Deeper blue(I read that the result was 2:1 and 67 draws). >> >>Intuition also tells me that the game is simpler than chess for computers. >> >>The number of squares for pieces is only 50 when the number of squares in chess >>is 64. >>The number of possible pieces for every side is only 2 when in chess there are >>more pieces. >> >>The number of possible positions is clearly smaller than chess. > >Chinook played the British/USA version of checkers. That has only an 8x8 board. >Last i heard there were no master strength programs for the 10x10 game, though >some programs were probably getting close. How many programs are there for the 10x10 game? I suspect that the reason that there are no good program may be the fact that people simply did not try to do programs for this game. The game seems to me simpler than chess even in cases that the board is 10*10. The number of legal positions is clearly smaller than 5^50. The branching factor is also smaller. I do not play this game but I read that an advantage of one pawn is usually decisive when it is not the case for chess when the side that is pawn down can often draw. I guess that finding other good pruning rules can be also easier in checkers than in chess. Uri
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.