Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:58:12 05/31/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 31, 2003 at 12:56:04, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: >On May 31, 2003 at 12:00:06, Mike S. wrote: > >>On May 31, 2003 at 11:41:06, emerson tan wrote: >> >>>Will comp-comp become positional as computers become faster? > >[...] > >> It has also been said (something like): postional play is just another term for very deep tactics, more or less. This could fit to the play of engines when they search very deep. > >For my opinion this is not true at all. The problem is still to evaluate quiet >positions only instead of positionally deescalated ones. You can have only a >goal within tree evaluation which is visible as a leaf node. As I know evaluated >leaf nodes today still ignore those dynamic positional aspects. The result is a >tactically strong play with positional highlights only by luck. > >Regards, Reinhard Programs do not need to evaluate all positions correctly in order to choose good positional moves. The point is that a positional advantage that they do not understand can be translated to positional advantage that they understand when they do a deep search. 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.