Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 10:35:14 05/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 2003 at 13:06:23, stuart taylor wrote: >The real test would be in a position in which there is no king safety, BUT the >tactics do NOT work. THIS is not a good proof to anything if the tactics DO >work! > I disagree. There might be exceptional positions like this, where the tactics do not work and black may escape. I guess, that Shredder may look to optimistic on such positions but most such positions _have_ tactics. The key to playing strength is not perfect evaluation but good speculation. >However, to the naked human eye, this position looks TREMENDOUS for white. >After only pxp played by white, then all whites pieces are teamed up against >blacks king except for the rook on e1 which is very easy to get onto the d-file >quickly. Whereas black is completely blocked up. > So I believe I would EASILY sacrifice a piece for such a position (if it were >otherwise equal), and I'd guess a computer would do it even more confidently. > The tactics are definitely there. BUT a computer needs to see in black and >white, but it looks SO imminent anyway that I'd expect the computer to >immeadiately realize multiple new problems in every 100th of a second. >YES! this position is not the problem! The problem is HOW TO GET into such a >position. Never mind about a missing piece! >S.Taylor is some programs will see this position on a leaf node, they may decide not to choose this line, because they are a piece down. Shredder will choose this line, bacause alredy his static evaluation of this position is positive for white.
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.