Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:45:17 07/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2001 at 07:25:50, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >On July 01, 2001 at 03:35:28, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On July 01, 2001 at 02:11:32, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>On June 30, 2001 at 23:02:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On June 30, 2001 at 17:17:41, Fernando Villegas wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi: >>>>>If you look at the ganme Adams won to Pocket Fritz, you will concur that we are >>>>>facing a program that, at least in this game, left the human side to kill him as >>>>>a child. The most elemental king attack I have seen in years and nevertheles >>>>>went OK. Blacks messing around in the queen side with no idea what to do as >>>>>amads prepared the knife. Not even elemental defensives moves to prevent what >>>>>was clearly coming with the obvious machine bishop-queen in the diagonal. >>>>>Sorry, but I have a Fidelity old piece of plastic that plays better than that... >>>>>Fernando >>>> >>>> >>>>You sound surprised. If you take a program that plays well at 1000K nodes >>>>per second, and run it on hardware where it can only search 1K nodes per >>>>second, what would you logically expect to happen? It will play with 1/1000th >>>>the skill (or even worse). >>> >>>In my opinion the whole Pocket Fritz concept is wrong. Why not use a more pure >>>tactical program instead of SMK's Shredder that has too much knowledge to run on >>>such a low hardware. >>>Kurt >> >>I do not believe that it has too much knowledge. >> >>The problem is simply that it has not enough knowledge. >>I do not believe that shredder has more knowledge than Junior and Fritz and I >>can see it does positional mistakes that Junior or Fritz can avoid because they >>have better positional understanding. >> >>I also do not believe that a program with more knowledge should be weaker in >>tactics. >> >>The opposite. >>A program with more knowledge should be stronger in tactics because of better >>knowledge which lines to prune and which lines to extend and better order of >>moves. >> >>Uri > >As far as I know a chess program normally becomes slower with more knowledge and >should therefore be weaker in tactics. >Kurt It becomes slower in nodes per second but it does not mean that it becomes weaker in tactics. The opposite. I know that the best mate solver (when the target is to prove the shortest mate) is considered to be a slow searcher in nodes per seconds. 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.