Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: Will TACTIC's eventually REFUTE! Positional play?

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 09:42:08 01/28/02

Go up one level in this thread

On January 28, 2002 at 09:59:30, Uri Blass wrote:

>On January 28, 2002 at 09:02:50, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On January 28, 2002 at 06:12:53, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>
>>>>Will TACTIC's eventually REFUTE! Positional play?
>>>
>>>In the end yes.
>>>
>>>It is my (new) opinion that the nature of chess is just search.
>>
>>the opposite is already clearly proven in tournament play Ed.
>>
>>Note that newer versions from most programs search less deeply
>>than older versions. This is also clear evidence.
>
>I am going to believe that new version search less deeply than older versions
>only if I see that they need more time to see tactics.

most tactical problems posted on ccc here by now , this includes
testsets like bs2830, they get solved by positional means nowadays
more than by tactical means as was in the past.

Good example is nolot #11:

r1b2rk1/1p1nbppp/pq1p4/3B4/P2NP3/2N1p3/1PP3PP/R2Q1R1K w - - bm Rxf7;

I remember a time that only diep solved this position.

>Uri

• Re: Will TACTIC's eventually REFUTE! Positional play? Robert Hyatt 10:54:01 01/28/02
  • Re: Will TACTIC's eventually REFUTE! Positional play? Robin Smith 17:15:52 01/29/02
  • Re: Well said Mr. Hyatt! (NT) Otello Gnaramori 02:33:46 01/29/02
• another example of positional solving Vincent Diepeveen 09:45:52 01/28/02
  • Re: another example of positional solving Miguel A. Ballicora 11:42:21 01/28/02

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.