Author: Graham Laight
Date: 16:16:35 07/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
Depends on the opponent. If you're playing a "normal" human, the consistency would probably be enough. If you're playing a GM who's especially good against computers - go for the brilliance. -g On July 10, 2001 at 13:45:33, Rich Van Gaasbeck wrote: >Say you were considering two chess engine designs. With one design you think it >would consistently find a good move, but not necessarily the best. Another >design might give the best move most of the time, but occasionally give a bad >move. > >Obviously one could make up positions in which either approach is better. In >real world games, though, which would lead to a better rating? > >In my chess readings I've come across sayings like: > >"Chess games are not won, but lost". > >"The person who won was the guy who made the second to last mistake". > >These point to consistency being more important than finding "great" moves, but >blundering move often. Is this true?
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.