Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Experiment: Search depth and ratings

Author: Russell Reagan

Date: 06:42:25 07/31/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 31, 2002 at 04:43:51, Uri Blass wrote:

[snip]
>It does not mean that humans can do it because
>they cannot see everything about tactics.
>
>I agree that humans can get to 2000 level
>by mastering tactics but it does not mean that
>they have no knowledge about passed pawns or
>weak pawns or mobility or king safety.
>
>They may not have more positional knowledge
>than 1600 players but the knowledge of 1600 players
>is more than piece square table.

Uri,

Yes, a human will not be able to see _everything_ like a computer does, but
don't you think if one worked hard they could progressively "see" everything up
to a certain depth? For example, let's say that I started off and just learned
chess, and I was only able to see 1 ply ahead and capture pieces en prise. If I
worked on my tactics, soon I would be able to see tactics that involved 2 plies,
then 3 plies, and then 4 plies. My goal is to be able to make sure that I am
solid up to a certain level of plies. For example, I want to be able to _know_
that I will not fall victim to any tactics 2 plies or less, then I want to
increase that to 3, then 4, and go as deep as I can. I think that in most games,
unless the opponent is very strong in tactics also, that a player will make
"small" tactical errors, and if you are able to catch _everything_ within a
certain number of plies, then you would win many games from tactics alone.

In other words, I want to _know_ that I am 100% solid up to a certain depth. For
example, I might find a 5 move combination in a game, but I might only be "100%
solid" up to 4 plies. I want to know what depth it is that I am able to catch
every tactical error my opponent.

What do you think?

Russell



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.