Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 09:49:43 09/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2002 at 09:25:57, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 10, 2002 at 09:18:50, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On September 10, 2002 at 09:06:27, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>The value of the endgame tablebases in chess is also small and programs probably >>>get no more than 20 elo from them. >>> >> >>Researched against human chessplayers? Or from your experience in clean comp vs. >>comp practice? >> >>Rolf Tueschen > >I do not think that there is a big difference. I don't know. Nut let's see. > >based on comp-comp games tablebases changed the results only in minority of >the cases. Ok, at least with both sides having tables... or at least input about the importance of certain endgames. See below. > >Humans usually do not get simple endgames against computers. This might be true but what does it mean? I'm referring to the fact that the leading programs use a feature for the early detection of certain endgame possibilities. So progs do not only rely on the tables themselves but also on early help for judging much later and only "possible" endgames. At least I understood it this way. Now my point is, that if the tables are not allowed, the mentioned control is impossible what increases the possibilities to make basic mistakes in the middle game. Seems trivial enough. We don't know much about the advantages because nothing is been made public. 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.