Author: Vine Smith
Date: 08:31:59 05/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 2002 at 06:22:37, Pekka Karjalainen wrote: >On May 04, 2002 at 07:19:48, Vine Smith wrote: > >>>http://www.buggy-online.com/english/match_samb_buggy/match_samb_buggy_e.htm > >>If you look at the analyzed games on the site, you'll notice a striking >>similarity to the situation in computer chess -- the program was a dangerous >>tactician, but had no "feel" for the position. Samb won the tiebreak by >>exploiting a positional weakness he had noticed in an earlier game. Since >>draughts is a more tactical game than chess, this would seem to indicate that >>positional problems will continue to plague chess programs far into the future. > > I am not sure I know what you mean by more tactical, but draughts would seem >to be less tactically complex to me than chess, since there are only two types >of pieces and the board is actually smaller. Only 50 squares are used in >draughts of the 10x10 board. > > Currently it seems that board games fall into a few major categories in human >vs. computer play: > >1) too simple > >tic-tac-toe - which is always a draw with competent human or computer play > >2) solved by computers only > >nine-mens-morris, go-moku > >where good human players can draw at best, but cannot beat the computer any >more, unless the game is a win with the first move advantage (or similar). even >then for tactically complex games the computer will be likely to win anyway, >since it does not make mistakes. > > (It was once claimed on the net by a nine-mens-morris player that the program >that solved the game cannot necessarily win a nmm tournament, since it is too >easy to draw against, while the best human knows how to swindle other human >players.) > >3) dominated by computers > >8x8 checkers, 8x8 othello > >where the top humans have not been able to demonstrate ability to beat the >computer for some time, yet the games are not yet solved or likely to be solved >in the near future. > >4) contested by humans at top level > >chess, 10x10 draughts, a few others > >games where the top computers do not yet clearly demonstrate superiority to >humans. the indications might be that they will get there, but we cannot know >how hard the last hurdles are to overcome. > >5) dominated by humans > >shogi, go > >games where there is still no question of seriously challenging the very best >human players by computers. shogi might fall to category 4) some day soon, but >I don't think computer go is going anywhere :-/ >Now, looking at this list, what does it mean that a game A is more tactical than >B? Can you explain? Does the term positional play in draughts have any >relation to positional play in chess, since they are two completely different >games? > >Pekka It might be a judgment call in the absence of establishing very precise definitions of what is meant by "tactical" and "positional" to prove one's case. However, I believe that the very simplicity of draughts is what makes the game so tactically oriented. Contact between the pieces occurs almost immediately, and calculation to great depth is required to determine the consequences of each move. I believe there are no "easy" moves in draughts that parallel "easy" moves in chess, where the correct move can sometimes be found almost with any calculation whatsoever. At the other extreme, go is almost entirely positional, and only certain situations like "ko fights" (if I remember the term correctly) can be calculated tactically. If I understand your argument correctly, I believe you are challenging whether draughts is more tactical than chess based on the fact that computer programs seem to be doing roughly as well in both games, implying they are equally tactical. I think, though, that draughts just gets much less attention than chess, and that if equivalent programming energy was devoted to draughts as to chess, then this game would also be dominated by programs like 8x8 checkers. I found the Samb-Buggy match strangely fascinating, despite not having played so much as 8x8 checkers for many years. There are many similarities to the chess world, even downloadable games in "PDN" format, where the "D" is for draughts, of course. It would be interesting to know what the draughts masters themselves think, and if there are any players who are reasonably strong in both draughts and chess that could make a truly informed comparison of the games. Regards, Vine
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.