Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:02:10 01/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2003 at 12:27:56, Dux Kazer wrote: >On January 22, 2003 at 12:06:37, Matthew Hull wrote: > >>On January 22, 2003 at 11:58:05, Christopher A. Morgan wrote: >> >>> >>>Bob, >>> >>>It shows me the abality of GK to negoiate a rule very favorable to him. >>>It is not at all certain that GK could, over the board, be certain of a >>>draw in a known draw position as determined with tablebases with, at least all >>>5 piece endings, and most likely some six piece endings. Now, in those >>>positions the game will end in a draw, which, in my view, is correct. This >>>does not address the situation where DJ sees a tablebase draw in its search and, >>>if it's losing trys to steer the game to that position. >>> >>>I like the rule. I do not see any contest between machine and man where >>>the machine looks up its move in a table, and waits for the human to make >>>a mistake. >> >> >>It is possible the machine could see a tablebase draw which a human would not >>know how to "solve" and thus lose the drawn position. The human would deserve >>the loss. This is the point of the man/machine contest. >> > > Oh Yes... but let the machine play without the tablebases and it will lose even >simple knight vs rook draw for sure, not to say KRP vs KR.. Not necessarily. Some programs can play krp vs kr pretty well without tables. I have special code to handle just this case, for example. I'm sure others do too. I'd play _anybody_ KR vs KN with crafty having the KN side... and not expect to lose. > >>If the possibility of a game like this is so remote, then why have the rule in >>the first place? >> >>It is a bad rule, IMO. >> >>Matt >> >> >>>That the machine has a huge opening book is somewhat similar, >>>but as GK has a tremendous knowledge of openings it seems fair that the >>>machine have a similar knowledge. >>> >>>We know nothing about the opening book for DJ. And, apparently, there are no >>>rules for the opening book. I would like to see a rule that limits DJ's >>>opening book to a set number of moves, like 10-15 moves. As far as we know >>>DJ's book may be all games played by all strong players who have ever played the >>>game through to the final move. Where is the contest if the machine >>>just looks up its move in a table? >>> >>> >>>On January 22, 2003 at 11:06:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On January 22, 2003 at 05:12:52, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: >>>> >>>>>An important rule went unnoticed here. >>>>> >>>>>The program can use the tablebase, but the game is declared draw when the >>>>>computer hits a tblbase draw! >>>>> >>>>>Not a trivial statement: imagine Kasparov gets into a position where he is in >>>>>disadvatage, he can try to enter in an endgame he knows to be drawn even not >>>>>knowing how to play it. >>>>> >>>>>A sort of compensation for the fact Deep Junior has the TB's. >>>>> >>>>>regards >>>>>Franz >>>> >>>> >>>>That is yet another example of the stupidest rule anyone could come up with.
This page took 0.01 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.