Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Static Eval Test

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 15:54:57 09/08/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 08, 2002 at 18:48:47, Peter McKenzie wrote:

it's poor tuned in diep, but quantity of terms also
can compensate for real fine tuning in such
positions. tuning is not a good word here :)

tuning here you need when the number of terms is real limited.

>On September 08, 2002 at 18:26:27, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On September 08, 2002 at 17:53:49, Peter McKenzie wrote:
>>
>>I'm a bit amazed you don't have all that knowledge in chop
>>yet.
>
>Yeah, its pretty embarrasing!
>Mainly the terms are there, but the tuning is poor.
>
>>
>>>On September 08, 2002 at 16:20:51, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 08, 2002 at 15:38:16, Peter McKenzie wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Ah yes sorry i should've derived it from other comments.
>>>
>>>no problem
>>>
>>>>But whatever you say or do, my comments which i made during
>>>>the game was that you were crushed in book here. Kure was
>>>
>>>My book wasn't the best here, no argument about that.  But at this moment (for
>>>better or for worse) I am working on the engine.
>>>
>>>>also smiling the entire game. The position after the opening
>>>>is impossible to play well for white.
>>>
>>>That might be a bit harsh, I think white could have at least put up a bit of a
>>>fight.  The point for me is that my program was totally clueless about the
>>>position, and that is something I really want to fix.  I've seen this hole in
>>>knowledge before, but never got around to fixing it.
>>>
>>>cheers,
>>>Peter
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On September 08, 2002 at 13:03:00, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 07, 2002 at 19:46:49, Peter McKenzie wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>black up 0.842 says DIEP. I don't follow your logics anyhow.
>>>>>
>>>>>Good eval from Diep, as expected.
>>>>>I am fixing my eval to say the something similar.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Black is totally won everywhere.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes of course, I accidentally wrote the opposite.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I've been having a break from computer chess post WCCC, but have now started
>>>>>>>going over some of Warp's games.  First up is Warp's worst game, the loss vs
>>>>>>>Brutus.  In this game, Warp showed a total lack of understanding of its
>>>>>>>centralised king in the early middlegame and lost without a fight.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I present here the position after move 21 in the game.  White has grabbed a pawn
>>>>>>>thinking this position is OK, but in reality the white king is hopelessly stuck
>>>>>>>in the centre.  Also, white is passive, black is active and has a safe king,
>>>>>>>therefore white is totally winning here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[D]r1r3k1/1p3ppp/b5q1/p7/4n3/P3PNB1/1P3PPP/1Q1RK2R b K - 0 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I am curious what the static evaluation of various programs is here.  The
>>>>>>>version of warp used in Maastricht gives 0.238 in favour of white.  Ideally the
>>>>>>>static evaluation should favour black here I think.
>>>>>
>>>>>I got that right though :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>cheers,
>>>>>>>Peter



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.