Author: Kurt Widmann
Date: 15:57:16 07/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2001 at 16:40:22, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >I do not think that the importance of opening theory is neglected by >computerchess enthusiasts. Most top programs have well generated book lines and >it is hard to find new ideas. Nowadays the programs need not play much moves of >their own (opening book, tablebases) or in other words: when fighting a computer >program you can no longer test the real strength of the programs. That's >somewhat a pity and the price of progress!! Is it fair if a program has stored >all the games of a player (like Kramnik) in its opening book and prepared >improvements at move 17, 25 and so on whilst the Grandmaster has no idea of the >opponents book lines? >Kurt The reason for my thinking are games posted with program names,but referring to "Einheits Buch",or "one book for most" all programs taking part in rated events. To me this seems unrealistic for determining a program strength. Example,Crafty was lost after a book line against Goliath. The reached position after the opening from powerbook is not lost,but crafty with time constraint could not find the drawing line. I still belief that the outcome of many games is predetermined by the chosen opening line. As to Kramnik, I am shure that Fritz will have all Kramniks games analysed and improved as part of its book. Kurt Widmann
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.