Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 15:19:58 06/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2003 at 18:01:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 19, 2003 at 17:17:15, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On June 19, 2003 at 16:43:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>I take the comment as what I said. The original position 2 had 8 pieces. He >>>complained about the evaluation. Even taking three pawns off it _still_ was >>>wrong. >> >>What in the WORLD are you talking about?? What article are you referring to? I'm >>going to this URL, which is at the top of this thread: >> >>http://www.clubkasparov.ru/521772350.html?462691585533321 >> >>What do you mean, "original position 2"? Has the article changed? > >"original position 2": the position given in the article. > >"modified position 2": the position you get if you "remove three pawns >as suggested by the author." > >Was that too hard to understand??? > > > >>? Because the >>current position 2 has 7 pieces (not 8) and if you take the pawns off (for what >>reason?), you're left with KB vs. KB, which you'd think Junior and Fritz would >>evaluate as a draw, and the couple sentences of discussion about it don't talk >>about databases at ALL. >> >>-Tom > > >On the other hand, you are correct. I meant position 1. Not position 2. > >So in the above replace 2 with 1 in both places. And we are back to the >point. Removing three of the pawns produces a bogus evaluation. Because >the tables were _not_ working. He _should_ have known that before writing >an article and publishing it. > >If you remove three pawns, it will be in the 5 piece tables. If he really >had them. He implied he did. But he didn't. And that leaves out the fact >that _some_ programs can get this one right without tables, even with the >original 8 pieces on the board. Mine can, for example. > >There is little excuse for saying something doesn't work, when it doesn't >work because of a user error. Publishing it is even worse. I think it's not optimal. It seems like he should have thought twice when his 5-man databases didn't give him the solution to a 5-man position. One can argue that his complaints are legitimate because the programs gave him the impression that the databases were installed when they weren't. I've always agreed with that point though. Now that you've dropped your assertion that the guy is an idiot because he wasn't counting kings as pieces in his 5-man positions, it seems like this has been discussed to conclusion. -Tom
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.