Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 18:14:12 05/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
I wonder if it is already a clear and solved issue the question of what its is "positionally good" in Chess Computer behaviour. I believe there are too many supositions in this field, beginning with the pretended positional acumen of Century. No that I say it have not, but it seems there is a penchant to suppose "positional" those programs that at the same time are supposed to heavily knowledge gifted. This last matter is also debatable. Even more, the positional test are also worthy of some discussion. Anyway, you can see with any program a great abysm between his results in those positional tests and his real positional behaviour in a real game. When you see childish mistakes or apreciations of the board, when dynamics is the key to understand and they ust put in operation a bigger or lesser box of tricks, then you cannot put in jeopardize so much faith in a test of this kind, no matter how good could be for other purposes. Fernando
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.