Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 07:48:39 01/30/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2002 at 10:19:55, Jon Dart wrote: >On January 30, 2002 at 01:57:54, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>The positions are actually quite different. The original one is >>about even, but yours is a straight win for white. > >Yes, but I thought you weren't concerned about a search result, just a >static eval. Both, actually. But you gave the static eval for another position :) Your second position is an idealised version where it's easier to see compensation because the pieces are in perfect positions, but that also has as a sideffect that it does really have a (highly) different value-after-search. The fact that both values are different seems to indicate white can never reach your second, idealised position. The test is to see if your program can _also_ spot compensation in the non-ideal position, which is harder. I suspect this will be too hard for most amateur programs, or even an older pro. Mine certainly can't, but Fritz 7 and Gambit Tiger, perhaps not so coincidentally the top, do. (This position is from the Corus tournament btw. Khalifman analyzed this position as 'better for white'. It came up several times and white won all games) -- GCP
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.