Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 16:40:51 02/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2003 at 13:39:05, Uri Blass wrote: >I am interested if someone cared to do a program to find >a list of lines that lead to chess positions ordered by the popularity of the >position > >The idea is to take a big pgn of games and to order positions based on the >frequency of the position in games(the initial position is position number 1 >with frequency of 100% because it happens in 100% of the games) > >The list can be something like > >no moves 100% >1.e4 51% >1.d4 49% >1.d4 Nf6 32% >1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 27%(includes also 1.c4 Nf6 2.d4 but only the popular way to get >the position is written in the list) >1.e4 c5 23% >1.e4 c5 Nf3 20% >1.e4 e5 14% >1.d4 d5 13% >1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 12% >1.c4 11% >1.Nf3 10% > >It may be interesting to find what is the first position when program can >blunder in the list and the first position when top program can blunder even >after many hours of analysis. > >Note that it is possible also to include lines when white wasted a tempo inside >lines that are written so game that began 1.c3 e5 2.c4 can be included in the >1.e4 c5 line. > >Uri I have also felt the strong desire for something similar to what you seem to be looking for. Megabase 2003 is an example of several large high-quality databases "out there." Having such percentages from such a large database would, IMHO, be extremely informative. In contrast, most, if not all, opening books for computers are special purpose lists made from collections of "games" [maybe analysis lines included] which are chosen with the chess engine in mind. The book maker has a highly specialized purpose in mind: To get the chess engine into positions which are favorable for the chess engine. That purpose greatly influences the percentages. Pure research, without regard to the possibility of an eventual application, would be more suitable for MY purposes. Scholarly research would study the impact of era, or date, on the distribution among other considerations. Perhaps a Computer Chess Club is not the right place for pure research. [Too much emphasis on making chess engines stronger.] Incidentally, maybe this is the place to reiterate one of my pet peeves. In the Kramnik vs DF, Kasparov vs DJ, and even in Kasparov's matches against IBM, the human was NOT playing against the machine for many moves at the beginning of each game. It's as if there were two matches going on. The first was against the book makers, and the second against the machine. A similar situation may have existed in endgames. Have these matches REALLY proven the strength of the chess engines? I say NO!!! Not even close. 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.