Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:46:11 11/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 2003 at 09:24:40, Torstein Hall wrote: >On November 17, 2003 at 08:48:30, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 17, 2003 at 07:40:46, martin fierz wrote: >> >>>On November 17, 2003 at 04:51:55, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>> >>>>On November 17, 2003 at 04:20:42, martin fierz wrote: >>>> >>>>[snip] >>>> >>>>>the real question should be: why do programs like fritz play these closed >>>>>positions worse than any 2000 player? fritz' programmers surely know about >>>>>those weaknesses, why have they never been addressed? with a whole team of >>>>>professionals working on it... >>>> >>>>Because it won't give you anything for the SSDF rating list? >>>> >>>>It probably takes much more work than just a few if-statements here and there, >>>>so if you're not committed to playing against humans, it probably won't happen >>>>that fast. >>> >>>it probably also takes much more than just a few if-statements here and there >>>for fritz to be the engine it is now :-) >>>and since frans morsch has claimed to have been optimizing against human play >>>over the last year (lame excuse for no progress or something else?), he should >>>definitely have addressed this issue. >> >>It is obviously a lame excuse as the last game proved. >>I guess that Fritz did not get better because the programmer is tired of working >>about it. >> >>It happened to Richard Lang and now it seems to happen to Frans morsch. >> >>Uri > >Do you know any chess program that has solved the problems of long term planning >in closed position? > >Torstein Long term planning is irrelevant for this discussion because bad static evaluation was the main problem of Fritz. Kasparov had a protected passed pawn for no compensation and for some reason Fritz evaluated the position as equal. Uri
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.