Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 08:34:57 03/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 28, 2002 at 11:31:28, SedatCambaz wrote:
>On March 28, 2002 at 11:15:11, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>
>>You cannot argue by only investigating one position that TheKing3.12d is weak in
>>the endgame. The T2002 tournament showed often the contrary: TheKing has much
>>endgame knowledge and the program of Johan de Koning played many good end games
>>and this despite the missing tablebase.
>>Kurt
>
>Ý dont argue The King 3.12d.Ý mean if other engines of elo 2500(Sos for
>Arena,Yace 0.99.56,Crafty 18.14) is finding very quickly the mate,
>Why in these position ,The champion of The T2002 tournament can't find the
>mate.Ý know that The King 3.12d is of elo nearly 2700.Ýf one program or human at
>least 2200 elo must find the mate in these position.
>I hope the new Chessmaster 9000 will not have the same problem,
>
>Best,
>Sedat
The mate has been calculated years before by powerful computers and has been
stored on disk. All those programs did was LOOK IT UP in a database
("tablebase").
If you removed access to tablebases from all of the chess programs out there
today, it's quite possible that ChessMaster would be among the strongest in
endgames.
However, when tablebases matter (which is only a fairly small percentage of
games), ChessMaster is at a disadvantage.
I believe the next version of ChessMaster will use tablebases.
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.