Author: Robin Smith
Date: 17:15:52 01/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2002 at 13:54:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: >Does this really matter? IE does it matter when I win a drag race, whether >I produced a bit more horsepower than my opponent, or whether I removed a few >more pounds from the automobile than he did? If one program has no eval >and one program has a big eval but no search, and they both play well, does >it really matter how they do it? Something tells me they will do the same >amount of "work" but that the work will be expended in different ways. To >produce the _same_ result... > >I think it is incorrect to solve tactical positions based on positional >concepts, because of the exceptions. I also think it is perfectly ok to >solve positional things tactically, because then you are seeing the _real_ >issue the "positional knowledge" is trying to generalize about... Bob, I agree fully with your paragraph one. Paragraph two seems to me to contradict paragraph one. Why is it "incorrect" to solve tactical positions based on positional concepts, "because of the exceptions", but "OK" to solve positional things tactically, when there are also many exceptions. For example search will OFTEN be enough to see that doubled-isolated pawns are bad, or that exposed Kings are bad. But frequently search is not good enough, and Crafty has code to detect these positional factors, I presume "because of the exceptions" search alone cannot find. I think the bottom line, fairly well explained in your paragraph one, if it wins games it works, "does it really matter how they do it?". No need then to talk about one way or the other being "incorrect" ...... unless it is poor at winning games. Robin
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.