Author: Rex
Date: 18:30:53 10/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
Jaime I totally agree in this statement. Also how well a program can work the oposition into this position is a strong point. On October 07, 2003 at 20:56:00, Jaime Benito de Valle Ruiz wrote: >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.