Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 02:32:44 02/21/02
Firstival on has to say that Ed Schroeder has written on his web site that Century4 plays not in the normal setting but in the anti-GM setting. I will not comment on this, since i do not have enough experience in how this setting changes rebel century4 playing style and strength. But what i can do is, to replay the games with rebel-century4 macheide and other programs (on my Athlon C-1200 mhz). 1. Macheide would have taken 12...Nxg3?! too (+0.36 for black). Shredder6.32 (the leader of the ssdf-computer-rating-list) would not have taken on g3 (0.06 for black Nxe5). Fritz7.0.06 Nxe5 with -0.04 for black. CSTal2.03 Nxe5 with +0.44 for black. Gambit-Tiger14.6 Nxg3 with +0.12. 2. The next "strange" move is 13...Rc8?!. Macheide would have played 13...Nxe5 with +0.32 for black. Shredder6.32 would have played 13...Nxe5 (+0.08 for white). Fritz7.0.0.6 Nxe5 with +0.00. CSTal2.03 Nxe5 with -0.01 against black. Gambit-Tiger14.6 Nxe5 with -0.08. 3. the move 14...Bd6?. Macheide 14...c4 with +0.30 for black. Shredder6.32 14...cxd4 with +0.43 for white. Fritz7.0.0.6 with Nxe5 +0.25 for white. CSTal2.03 c4 with -0.09 against black. Gambit-Tiger14.6 plays Bd6 with -0.32. 4. the move 17...Rcc7!?. Macheide wants to play fxg5 with -1.13 against black. Shredder6.32 wants to play Bf8 with +2.18 for white. Fritz7.0.0.6 fxg5 +1.15 for white. CSTal2.03 fxg5 -1.64 against black. Gambit-Tiger14.6 plays fxg5 with -1.52. 5. the move 22...Qe8!?. Macheide plays Qe8 with -1.75 against black. Shredder6.32 plays Bc7 with +2.56 for white. Fritz7.0.0.6 plays Qe8 with +1.90 for white. CSTal2.03 plays h6 with -1.67 against black. Gambit-Tiger14.6 plays Qe8 with -2.52. Conclusion: I think, when we can learn something out of the second game, than it is how important it is to change computerchess paradigm. MANY chess programs are helpless against a human beeing playing this kind of chess against them. And trying to be the best in the swedish-rating list will not wipe out the illusion that getting the first rank has not much to with chess at all. We are always talking about the programs making progress. When i see Van Wely playing such a nice game, i see almost no progress in computerchess at all. The question has to be: why is their no progress ? I think i know the asnwer. Because nobody is interested to make a different approach. The programmers are most often interested in killing their opponent, their major enemy in the ssdf-list, or their major opponent in a tournament or world-computer-chess championship. Maybe this is the right target in such a microcosmos. but then computerchess is only a subgroup, a microcosmos in the macrocosmos chess. Maybe we can call computerchess: 2 dimensional chess. Flat chess. Those games let us feel that we need another dimension. In the same way - btw - physicist tried to throw the spirit out of the science. as if their brains had no spirit. Good that Jean E. Charon brought the spirit back with its complex relativity theory. Where are the Charons of computerchess ??
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.