Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:22:28 12/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 12, 2003 at 05:53:53, Claude Le Page wrote: >Hello Ricardo! >You are right: engines are quite able to find innovations in opening >( I mean valuable ones ) >I have some instances of it , the most striking being this one: >junior7/goliath : >1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 d6 4 d4 g5 5 h4 g4 ,and now in place of book move >6 Ng1 , it "invented" a"new" gambit 6 Bxf4!? gxf3 7 Qxf3 and won with brillancy >I put quotes , since it was not really brandnew since it has 3 entries in >CB database onlie , with only 1 white win , due to Karacsony Attila : hence , I >named it Attila gambit ; this one seems to be quite sound , and compare >favourably with Muzio gambit to which it is akin >there are still other instances of these novelties >one point is to notice: all these novelties are the fact of junior7 tha seems to >be the most tactically strong engine of all times Amir ban said that since Junior5 the main improvement in Junior is in the evaluation and not in the search so I do not believe that Junior7 is the strongest tactical program. >I take the oppotunity to say that it is A CRIME to have removed junior7 from >sale , instead of presenting an improved version as was done for fritz or >shredder (for junior8 is not an improved version of junior7 , but something >quite different and tactically less strong ) Why do you think that Junior8 is tactically less strong than Junior7? There are sacrifices in the opening that have nothing to do with tactics but with evaluation. If Junior7 can find them when Junior8 cannot find them it may be only result of the fact that the programs have different evaluation and the same different evaluation can help Junior8 to find better moves in different positions. 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.