Author: Mats Winther
Date: 23:58:08 04/13/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 13, 1998 at 19:45:30, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Sure, positional chess is something else that counting nodes. In fact, >strategy and positional considerations are the necessary answer to the >fact that we -and even machines- cannot count enough nodes to take >really clever decisions. They are a kind of short-cut or replacement to >what would be, or is, in theory, the very very best thing to do, that >is, just counting all to fulfill the calculation. This is where I and everybody else disagree. I don't think that positional considerations are "short cuts" to fulfilled calculations. I hold the view that positional considerations are a compensatory view of chess. It is a tool whereby you can dissect positions that otherwise would not be solvable. This phenomenon occurs in mathematics too. When mathematicians have developed a new mathematical tool they will be able to solve things that previously were unsolvable no matter how much calculations they did with their older theory. Your view of chess is reductionistic since you think that every position can be solved by raw calculation. I am opposed to this view. Regards Mats
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.