Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Slate's Challenge of the Day

Author: Jaime Benito de Valle Ruiz

Date: 17:56:00 10/07/03

Go up one level in this thread


On October 07, 2003 at 19:58:29, Jeremiah Penery wrote:

>On October 07, 2003 at 18:48:30, Slater Wold wrote:
>
>>[D]r2br1k1/1b1n2p1/p2pp1Pp/qp6/3BPP2/P1N5/1PPQ4/1K1R1B1R w - -
>>
>>This game can be over in ~10 moves.
>>
>>Can you find Bxg7?
>
>This is a modified Crafty that isn't extremely well tuned.  I haven't made any
>changes in a long time, and it often overvalues attacking chances.
>Nevertheless, sometimes it produces good results. :)
>
>              depth   time  score   variation (1)
>                1     0.00   3.47   1. Bxg7
>                1->   0.00   3.47   1. Bxg7
>                2     0.00     ++   1. Bxg7!!
>                2     0.00   4.18   1. Bxg7 Kxg7 2. Qxd6


Surely if you tune an engine properly it'll find "amazing" moves now and then
(esp. when the King's safety is at stake) by over-rating the chances of an
attack. But, what about the rest of the games? I've managed to configure lots of
engines to find extremely hard sacrifices... but after several games, their
overall performance become clearly much worse than normal in normal games!
I just find it estrange that most commercial engines such as Fritz, Shredder or
Junior (to name three) can’t see anything within a minute, but your version has
no problems at all finding it in almost no time!!!
If it shows a more consistent behavior, I want a copy!! Otherwise, it's not an
useful result
Regards,

  Jaime




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.