Author: K. Burcham
Date: 14:26:36 05/23/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2002 at 15:47:41, Dan Andersson wrote: >It's OK as long as it goes for the king :) I'm concerned with the crowd of >people that consider computers better at tactics than humans. Shallow tactics, >no problem! Deep tactics not a chance. > >MvH Dan Andersson Dan can you please elaborate on your opinion. Please explain further. Can you give some examples of what you are refering to. I posed this question in another thread, GM vs program in tactical positions. All I got was some shallow answers, and empty general statements, except for Vincent, he had a good reply. Could you be more specific. Are you saying that a GM in a given position can see a winning move when a program might not? Are you saying that a GM in certain posiitions will make the right move, and a program will not. Can you give an example of a specific game where a GM made a tactical move, that one of my programs cannot find or takes too long to find? Or maybe you might already have some positions that you know a human can tactically see, that one of my programs cannot see or will take too much time to play. kburcham
This page took 0.01 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.