Author: Milorad Madjar
Date: 04:43:06 07/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
comparison. >>>Programs are supposed to solve some problems and the way that they solve it is >>>unimportant. >> >>I think it is veri important.Because If you go on this way, today or tomorrow >>you can have very big Tbs and very big opening book and two chess programs Will >>be play 20-30 >>moves with very big opening book and have 10 moves in the middlegame and that go >>to very big Tbs. >> I put to you one question : where is the chess ??? If the game have 60 >>moves in this game you have only 10 moves of really chess !!!! > >What is "really chess"? In an endgame for example: "really chess" is >non perfect moves by humans or perfect moves by engines? >And what is chess? A game which might be as silly as tic-tac-toe. Because it's >much more complicated, we play some moves and say "i have a good plan" >"this move is wrong"... but i don't think this is really chess. >Chess for me is the algorithm that will prove that chess is a "first/second >player wins/or draw game". > >You don't understand that chess engines have created to play as perfect chess >they can. And as tablebases make their play better, they had to be used. >And if one day, someone find a way to have 32 piece tablebases or >one algorithm to play perfect chess, then we would have only one line which >engines would play all the time. I love non perfect moves by humans (or chess program), because if I have know who is winner after first move and if all games determine ( fix ) after tiss move the chees is dead! When we know moment our death (end) in this moment we will stop life . I love way (all moves) and end (winner), not only end (winner). regards Milan
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.