Author: Telmo Escobar
Date: 08:52:05 11/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 2003 at 09:16:14, Uri Blass wrote: >Here is a position from my last tournament game [D]r4rk1/1ppq1pbp/3p1np1/p2Pp3/2P5/1PNP2Pb/PB3PBP/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 15 > >I evaluated the position as better for black >I assumed in that game that I need the white bishop so I played Bh1 > I share your preference for Bh1. But this doesn't mean that I disagree with computer (or human) evaluation that the given position is roughly balanced or, even, it slightly favors Black. The point is that I tend to play for a win as much as the position tolerates such dreams, and in the given position, my feeling is that White couldn't possibly play for a win after the swap of light coloured bishops. Chess programs are not humans and they don't play like humans. Also they don't play the move one could regard as logic, they just consult their evaluation and, well, make a move without further thought. For me, that isn't playing chess at all. Numerical evaluations, like engines do, have no objective value in my view. Computers depend upon them because computers are not alive, and they -without that kind of conventional scale- don't know how to choose a move. Telmo
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.