Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:34:13 12/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 08, 2002 at 09:32:12, Bob Durrett wrote: >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. I believe that on the fast hardware of today piece square table with good search algorithms are enough to get 2300 fide rating. Latest Movei has more than piece square table but it's search algorithms can be improved so the total result is probably also similiar. Uri
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.