Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 13:23:28 07/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2002 at 11:04:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: >In general, you are going to have to do this code development _anyway_ so that >you can combat people that play 1. h3 and 2. a3 for example. Because if you >play silly opening moves, white can afford to give up a couple of tempi in >order to get you to play garbage moves. So you _have_ to fix that. But when >you do, you will _still_ fall into traps that are too deep for your search to >see, and that will be the next problem you have to face. > >Opening books provide two key things: > >1. quick moves to save time and provide randomness so that the program >plays a variety of different opening systems. Without a book, it will play >the same stuff over and over and eventually lose the same games over and >over and over. > >2. avoids known deep traps. This is not nearly as common as the point 1 >above, but it can be critical if people are trying to "prep for you" by >planning on playing obscure lines that you won't know, to get you into a >position where you are lost without knowing it. I think adding: 3 (or 1b.). Aiding (proper) development and perhaps castling. Quite a few engines are incapable of finding solutions to either without getting into difficulties. Repeating it over and over again doesn't make it better of course. Regards, Mogens
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.