Author: Torstein Hall
Date: 09:29:26 11/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 24, 2002 at 08:57:51, stuart taylor wrote: >On November 24, 2002 at 07:49:59, Marc van Hal wrote: > >>On November 24, 2002 at 05:44:54, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>On November 23, 2002 at 22:38:43, Terry McCracken wrote: >>> >>>>Yes, maybe with some refinements;-) >>> >>>But not refinements that can increase playing strength, or atleast results >>>and/or charm? >>>S.Taylor >> >>I think your wrong about the charm it now also has Real 3d pieces. >>Marc > >Oooooh sorry! That's also charm, for sure! But I was refering to it's playing >style, meaning depth and knowledge etc. > >If a program wins the same amount of games beautifully and with obvious depth of >understanding, as another program does simply in a cold bloodied way, then I >would say that the first program is actually a bit stronger, than the second. > Work it out for yourself! >S.Taylor I would say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some people prefer a long positional game, while others find beauty in romantic 18 century attacks. So I think your charm question is unanswerable. Torstein
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.