Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 06:32:12 12/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 07, 2002 at 23:22:58, Walter Faxon wrote: >On December 06, 2002 at 21:04:50, Bob Durrett wrote: > >>On December 06, 2002 at 20:11:47, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>On December 05, 2002 at 20:31:41, Bob Durrett wrote: >>> >><snip> >> >>>>Now, here is a test: [You have five seconds to answer.] What are the >>>>definitions of tactical and positional positions? [Tick, tick, tick.] >>> >>>Tactical: In shorter range a direct advantage could be produced. >>>Positional: No direct advantage in material is obtainable >> >>I read somewhere [a book by Larry Evans] that advantages can conveniently be >>partitioned into (a) material, (b) pawn structure, (c) time, and (d) space. >> >>The time advantage could be a lead in development. Having the "initiative" also >>belongs somewhere in here. >> >>So, to get more specific: >> >>The issue seems to be whether or not a chess engine can examine a position and >>determine whether or not there is a pawn structural advantage/disadvantage, a >>time (development) advantage/disadvantage, and/or a space >>advantage/disadvantage. Also, at issue is whether or not modern chess engines >>can or do detect the fact that one side has the initiative. Additionally, I >>wonder whether or not the modern chess engines are programmed to seize the >>initiative and use it. Perhaps those more familiar with the current crop of >>chess engines could enlighten us on this. >> >> >> <snip> >> >>>Rolf Tueschen >>> >>>> >>>>Bob D. > > >Hi, Bob D.; all. > >IIRC, Hsu's new book on Deep Blue mentions that their program had no feature >corresponding to "the initiative"; that when they tried to put one in, the >machine played worse. To realize an advantage, sometimes you must defend, and >DB saw deeply enough to see "beyond" the initiative as it is usually defined. >Also, I think Evans later expanded his list to include King safety. And >remember that it is always wise to consider trading in one advantage for a more >durable one (time for space, space for material). > >-- Walter Thanks. I didn't see this until after I posted a new bulletin on this topic. I wish I had included king safety, although we have discussed king safety quite a bit here recently. For example: Uri says his movei does not have anything in it for king safety and yet it plays a decent game of chess. Bob D.
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.