Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 11:44:41 09/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2002 at 12:32:18, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>Tables are such surplus advantages in my eyes and not integrated part of >>computer machines as such. For the moment they give the machine an unfair edge. >> >>Rolf Tueschen > >How so? You have the tables as well. Feel free to memorize them too. The fact >that the computer has less trouble in memorizing them than the human is as >unfair as the human can more easily recognize chess-relevant patterns on the >board and use this information to forward-prune the chess-tree. > >Sargon John Nunn has shown that perfect tables can't be memorized because it goes possibly over 150 moves in each variation. Each different, of course, depending on the concrete position. N endgames are most difficult. Note also that super computers needed weeks to make their calculations. But human players could never find the rational in such long lines no matter how long they could study. All facts here based on John Nunn from his endgame books and articles! Why humans can't read the perfect moves too in books they kept in their pockets? Rolf Tueschen
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.