Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Na3 wins again - Deep Shredder played an bad move!

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 10:34:40 06/28/01

Go up one level in this thread


On June 28, 2001 at 12:33:04, Uri Blass wrote:

>On June 28, 2001 at 10:55:21, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On June 28, 2001 at 09:16:47, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>The book does not include every legal move so practically you need clearly less
>>>than 197000 moves to cover 4 plies in your book.
>>>
>>>Another point is that some of the positions are the same with different order of
>>>moves and you only need to rememeber the positions
>>>
>>>It is possible to cover 6 plies and it is practically enough to avoid repeating
>>>the same line gain  and again.
>>
>>This is one of those cases where it "looks easy" but is not.  Try to sit down
>>and write such a book and see how hard it is to type a few hundred thousand
>>moves and make sure you don't include moves that lose quickly.
>
>The computer can do it automatically and find some moves that do not lose
>immidiately.
>
>If it needs to analyze million positions for that purpose then it is possible to
>do it by analyzing every position for a minute.
>
>It is possible to do it in a few monthes by using some computers for this
>purpose.
>>
>>Then the book learning is going to make you try each choice for the computer
>>and then nix it when it loses.  Meanwhile, the same theme arises over and
>>over with the computer out of book.  If it has an opening weakness, it will
>>be obvious...
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>The computer can avoid repetition of the same 3 moves in hundreds of games
>>>when it has 5-10 responses in almost every position.
>>>Even if you use only 2 plies you can get a lot of different games.
>>>
>>>first game may be 1.e4 c5 2.Na3 d6
>>>second game 1.e4 c5 2.Na3 e6
>>>third game 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6
>>>4th game 1.e4 c5 2.Na3 Nc6
>>>5th game 1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 e5...
>>>
>>>You are going to  need a lot of games to get one repetition of a line that was
>>>played in the past and humans have better things to do then to learn hundreds of
>>>lines against the machine and they need not only to learn hundreds of lines but
>>>also to find hundreds of lines to beat the machine.
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>
>>You don't necessarily have to repeat the same "game" to win over and over.
>>The computer is out of book so quickly the same weakness will be seen repeatedly
>>since the book is not really helping it when it is that shallow.
>
>The point is that the opponent will have to think in the game and simply
>repeating is not enough so it is going to make it impossible for 2100 players to
>win again and again or to win by repeating the same opening every game with the
>idea of trying to correct the error in the next game.
>
>Uri


We are talking about two different things.  I am thinking of the case where I
take you out of book quickly, and then set up a stonewall-type attack, for one
specific example.    I won't be repeating the same _moves_ necessarily, but I
will be repeating the same _theme_ over and over and over...



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.