Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:35:15 04/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2002 at 18:12:17, Keith Ian Price wrote: >On April 29, 2002 at 15:49:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 29, 2002 at 14:01:23, Joe McCarro wrote: >> >>>If I were playing someone over the board and they seemed to give me a >>>possibility to play Bxa1 snatching the rook I would think long and hard before >>>doing that. I'd figure as long as this isn't a trap I will win the game. Let me >>>take my time to just make sure its not a trap. I wonder if this couldn't be >>>programmed in. Anytime the other player makes what on the surface appears to be >>>a blunder (e.g., drops over a pawn) the computer could spend extra time working >>>out the position before moving. If it ended up it was in fact just a blunder >>>presumably the computer should still be able to win despite the extra time spent >>>looking for the tactical shot. If it found it wan't a blunder the computer >>>might avoid taking the poison. Do the programmers do anything like this? Would >>>this in fact be helpful or would it have disadvantages as well? >> >> >>There are two choices here: >> >>1. They made a blunder hanging the rook. >> >>2. after due consideration your opponent decided that either the rook could >>not be saved, or it could not be captured without exposing you to lots of >>difficulties. >> >>In choosing which of the above is true, you would need to know your opponent >>and his FIDE/whatever chess rating... > >Not really. If your opponent were a Patzer the extra time won't hurt. Your >program will still beat him. If he were a GM, you could assume case number two, >and it would be wise to take a longer look. So the choice that benefits either >way is to take a longer look. The question is--How much longer? > >kp None unless the score is dropping steadily. Then you might have a problem.
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.