Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 10:25:48 05/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 06, 2002 at 06:33:48, Steve Maughan wrote:
>Christophe,
>
>>"Knowledge" in the sense of positional evaluation (that's what most people
>>think about when they talk about knowledge) makes for 10% of the strength of a
>>chess program.
>>
>>Chess is 90% about tactics (which is a concept close to "search").
>
>I think it was Alekehine that said chess was 99% tactics - so maybe you're
>giving too much weight to positional terms :-)).
>
>However, isn't it a little misleading to talk about percentages since you only
>need to make one positional mistake to lose the game. So if you make one
>positional error every ten moves you're going to have a weak program.
On the other hand, make just one tactical mistake in 100 moves and it is enough
to lose as well...
>Here's another similar question - how strong do you think Tiger would be if you
>replaced the evaluation with a static piece table evaluation (i.e. evaluation
>that is the same for *all* positons)? Would it be CT - 200 ELO?
It would be very weak, mainly because it would blunder every passed pawns
endgame.
If you want to see this in action, dig out Fritz 2.
But it does not tell much.
Christophe
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.