Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 13:44:51 12/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 2001 at 11:55:21, Christophe Theron wrote:
>On December 29, 2001 at 04:40:03, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>
>>On December 29, 2001 at 04:24:55, Otello Gnaramori wrote:
>>
>>>On December 28, 2001 at 23:51:33, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote:
>>>
>>>>On December 28, 2001 at 21:57:03, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I think it is rather well established by now that human players are, like
>>>>>computers, studying a chess tree, trying to find the best possible continuation.
>>>>
>>>>Actually, not. That is the vicious influence from Kotov's teaching that
>>>>made everybody think that they should think like a tree.
>>>>There are recently two books that finally made in writing what everybody
>>>>suspected. "Improve your Chess Now" by J. Tisdall and "Secrets of Practical
>>>>Chess". Not even amateurs are taught NOT to think like a tree nowadays, and the
>>>>best book about it is "How to reasess your Chess" by J. Silman.
>>>>
>>>>First quote from Tisdall's book, first Chapter ("The Fabled Tree of Analysis"):
>>>>
>>>>"I do not think like a tree - do you think like a tree?" GM Anatoly Lein.
>>>>
>>>>There are certain situations where a strong player think like a tree, but
>>>>their thinking should certainly not be characterized by that.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Taking as an example Kasparov, he is renowned for his powerful calculations
>>>capabilities of the variations (...tree), both in analysis and both in OTB.
>>
>>Being able to come up with variations does not a tree searcher make.
>>
>>A SEE can come up with a variation and it's not searching anything.
>
>
>
>I don't think so.
>
>My SEE for example is a recursive function. It is a tree searching algorithm,
>but a special one
Maybe you should call it a DEE then.
-Tom
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.