Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 03:26:45 02/04/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2004 at 05:12:48, George Tsavdaris wrote:
> I don't think he ever said Shredder 8 is a poor engine. He just said that
>Shredder 8 was tricked by a program from 5 years ago with an obvious sacrifice
>that it didn't see it is dangerous.
> Of course Shredder 8 will kill CSTal-2 in a long game contest but some times
>things like this happen. Shredder it isn't yet invincible, so a dangerous
>program like CSTal-2 can win some times.
right. of course shredder8 is strong.
but this game was not a BLITZ game, it was not played on a 450 P3,
it was a serious time control on a serious machine.
and the idea behind the moves is (for a human beeing) clear like the sky.
CSTal moves the pieces in a classical way. like Botvinniks trajectories
it knows how to bring them into position.
14...Qc7 {-0.30/18} 15. Bxh6 gxh6 {-0.40/15} 16. Qxh6 Rfd8 {-0.54/16}
17.Rd3 Nh7 {0.00/17} 18.f4 Bf8 {0.01/18} 19.Rg3+ Kh8 {0.01/18} 20. Qh5 Rab8
{0.35/17} 21.f5 exf5 {0.85/16} 22.Rf1 Rd7 {0.84/19} 23.Rxf5 f6 {0.84/18}
you cannot say that shredder8 did not compute not deep enough.
it only computes the wrong moves. but the search depth is ok :-))
18 is not bad :-))
if anybody wants to try out different black moves, i can ask CSTal for the
answer.
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.