Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:33:10 11/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 07, 2001 at 09:27:21, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On November 07, 2001 at 09:24:13, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 07, 2001 at 09:19:27, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On November 07, 2001 at 09:09:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On November 07, 2001 at 08:59:35, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>So you 'proof' whether a move is bad using a preprocessor program >>>>junior 5.9 by letting it play some other engine out that line? >>>> >>>>That's how you play corr chess? >>> >>>There are cases when I play comp-comp games to learn about unclear positions. >>>I also check some ideas of me in games and there are rare cases when I play a >>>move that was not suggested by computers even after a long search. >>> >>>Uri >> >>I can add that Junior5.9 is not a preprocessor in most positions >>Junior5.9 did good results with black(did not lose) >>so if it is a preprocessor and weak then the fact that it did not lose the games >>only support my opinion. >> >>I considered Junior5.9 to be weaker than Deep Fritz and >>I decided not to play Nd5 after seeing that Deep Fritz is unable to win with >>white against Junior5.9 >> >>Uri > >Let's assume you are right and that junior5.9 is weaker than fritz. >Let's guess it at 40 elopoints. that means that it still >scores like 42% against deepfritz. > >So in 42% of the cases you are going to make a wrong assumption? Junior5.9 played one alternative after the forced line and I have not infinite time per move. I decided to stop to check Nd5 because I was afraid that even in case that Rg7 is not good for black Nd5 is bad because of another alternative like Rg5. 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.