Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: I must say i disagree! No opening's.... itsNOT chess!

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 01:17:27 12/30/02

Go up one level in this thread


On December 30, 2002 at 04:03:58, Terry McCracken wrote:

>On December 30, 2002 at 00:18:30, robert flesher wrote:
>
>>To denude a program  of it's opening book and play fischer random ,shuffle, or
>>whatever... will serve only to accomplish that we no long have chess. By this i
>>mean that opening preparation plays a very critical role and engines are even
>>tuned to understand specific chess positions. Take away Kasparov's opening
>>knowledge and he would never have become World Champion. FACT! is Kasparov still
>>very good at position judgment??....yes.....is he still good at
>>tactic's??....yes. Think of the last time you were on a chess server and lost to
>>someone who was considerably lower rated than you....OK tell me you have never
>>lost because someone nailed you in your favourite opening because they received
>>the lastest informant or NCO,MCO,ECO before you(and they did homework :). In the
>>end the opening is as important and the middlegame, or endgame. IMHO ...Cheers~
>
>If you want to know _true_ engine power, you need to turn off the books,
>thinking on opponents time etc.
>
>Alan Tomalty (Computer Chess Expert of Komputer Korner) presented this idea back
>in 1987!
>
>He suggested that "thinking" on opponants time to be disabled also.
>
>The problem I see is, that these games need to be operated manually, due to the
>absence of books, to avoid repeated positions.
>
>The SSDF doesn't have the luxury of testing engines this way, too time
>consuming.
>
>The idea certainly has merit, but it boils down to how much time you lose in
>such testing, as it can't be done by auto-play.
>
>Yes the opening is a vital aspect of chess, and chess can't be complete without
>it, but this kind of testing is to rate engine strength in the middlegame,
>mostly and endgame, without EGTB's.
>
>Terry

endgame without tablebases?

I think that it is ridicilious when some authors simply removed knowledge
after adding tablebases.

I read that nimzo cannot mate in KQ vs K positions without tablebases(these
problem is new and nimzo could mate before the programmer added tablebases).

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.