Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:57:19 10/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 27, 2003 at 11:04:24, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On October 27, 2003 at 10:57:34, Uri Blass wrote: > >Again you fail your exam as statistical mathematician. > >Please apply statistics onto next. > >tested games: 100000 > >Best opening: 1.e4 > >opening played by Jeroen for Tiger + Rebel: 1.e4 > >Opening played by Sjeng : 1.d4 > >Sjeng is more aggressive and has less positional knowledge than the above 2 >engines. > >What does your mathematical insight say to you here? Mine says to play the opening I expect to do best with. I've played 1. d4 in _many_ tournaments to avoid prepared lines in response to 1. e4. Mine does not say to wildly speculate since I know that programs are different. And they will likely handle different openings better depending on the program. Why does it matter what someone _else_ chooses to play in their book? Isn't that beyond your control and/or interest? Should not you spend more time worrying about what _you_ are going to play or why _your program_ lost games, rather than wondering about what books were used by which opponents and why?
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.