Author: martin fierz
Date: 22:46:15 10/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2002 at 00:40:04, Peter Kappler wrote: > >I think that the 1.5 pawn threshold you guys have chosen is going to generate a >lot of false positives: > > - sacrifices that Crafty (or any computer) can't understand > - Kramnik choosing to win a rook instead of mating in 9 > - sacrifices that probably aren't completely sound, but > are perfectly reasonable in human vs human play absolutely. the idea is of course that we are checking these games, not just trusting crafty's 1second analysis. of the 184 games, crafty let 117 go unannotated. i will look at all the remaining games with fritz, and judge for myself if the positives are false or not (hint: they are false, most of the time, for exactly the reasons you list). >are scrutinized by players all over the world. If he had made a blunder of that >magnitude (missing a 1-ply tactic when not in time trouble) it would have >already been published. i totally agree. it's something i wrote here before, but some people here don't understand just how extraordinary this move was :-) aloha martin
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.