Author: James T. Walker
Date: 13:54:26 07/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 12, 2002 at 16:44:17, Alastair Scott wrote: >On July 12, 2002 at 14:46:06, James T. Walker wrote: > >>The obvious point here is that these are weaknesses in the programs. In my >>opinion they are valuable games which programmers should use to fix any of these >>"weaknesses". When you have a "2600" program losing to a 2200 player it's a >>good idea to find out why. The bottom line will be stronger programs with fewer >>weaknesses. >>Jim > >It depends what you play chess for. I, as a 2000 player, can beat all sorts of >programs using something akin to the 'Nemeth technique'. However, the net effect >is that doing so does me no good because deploying it against human players >would be utterly perverse. > >Now what is the analogue for programs; is their purpose to beat other programs >(in which the Nemeth technique is a sideshow) or humans (in which case it >probably should be tackled, despite the caveats above)? > >Alastair The purpose of programs is different for different users but for almost all programmers of these programs the purpose probably should be to beat all humans and most computers. :) Jim
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.