Author: Slater Wold
Date: 18:37:44 04/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 18, 2002 at 20:46:49, Vine Smith wrote: >I have a theory about Junior 7 -- in some positions involving material loss for >what it believes is adequate compensation, something prevents it from ever >changing its mind further in the search. This may either be intentional, to get >it to sacrifice without "wimping" out because the other side can resist for a >while, or it may be a bug of some sort. Otherwise, how to explain its behavior >(in analysis mode, otherwise the book would intervene) after 1.b3 d5 2.Bb2, when >it insists, up to 21 deep (when I gave up), that 2...e5? is the best move, >giving up a pawn for nothing. There's another position like this that I could >dig up for you, if you're interested, where Uri Blass had Junior 7 analyze a >position from a game I played against the Winboard engine Ufim, where Junior >will not admit it has no compensation for a lost pawn no matter how deeply it >searches. > >Regards, >Vine DJ7 plays very "speculative" chess. No doubt about it. And it seems to do rather well at it. I think most people know, it's my favorite program. This move isn't exactly "simple" to a human, but to most programs (commercial and amateur) it is. It's like DJ7 has all this amazing talent, and knowledge. It can find things most others will never evalaute. But sometimes, I think it lacks "common sense" in a computer chess kind of way. Uh hum.......like pawn endings. I've seen it blow more of those than anything else.
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.