Author: Peter Berger
Date: 12:37:33 11/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 04, 2001 at 15:24:45, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On November 04, 2001 at 15:07:33, Peter Berger wrote: > >>The way it is dealt with currently is somehow similar to team events with the >>programmer being the team captain. > >Which fits in nicely with the fact that for example the openings >are often prepared by a third person. > >>The principal situation you described above could be dealt with a contempt >>factor for example - much nicer solution. > >If you want to play out all those opposite-bishop endgames, >go ahead. Neither me nor Noomen felt the need to prove that >a lone knight vs king doesn't win. > I don't want to argue and there are cases as the one you described where I would agree. But the position in the Tiger game wasn't one of these . In a match beween two computers I'd expect any result to be possible in this position. I tried with a few engines and the evalutation and lines suggested differ very much. So the decision to accept a draw offer is either based on thoughts about the strength of the opponents ( a team captain's decision - so my comment about the contempt factor) or on the insight of the operators ( that most probably are worse players than their babys). I'd prefer the engines to battle it out if there is even the slightest doubt. Ah, well - whatsoever: definitely not the right moment to discuss such a topic. My most sincere congratulations for the the very good Sjeng performance in this tournament ! And even more of those for Gerd Isenberg !! It seems the Berlin tournament turned out to be a nice preparation event for him :) And also to Bas Hamstra : maybe it's really time to update that notebook for the next tournament ;). Regards, pete
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.