Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 10:17:20 02/04/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2004 at 12:59:04, Harald Faber wrote: >Honestly, only fools would. And fail to win. cstal did and won against a strong chess program . is it a fool ? the difference between a fool and the genius is IMO the outcome of an idea. >It is the work the attacker has to do also just to make sure that the move, in >this case a sac, works. Because otherwise you lose. wrong. you don't have to prove that the idea works. the opponent will do. you have a thesis and you try it out. the better your thesis, the more often it will work. it worked for cstal against genius and shredder. so you can win without proving that it works. of course it took the programmer arround 4 years finetuning with lots of games testing. 4 years without a new version. you can only do as a commercial chess programmer if you have enough money or if you do it for fun. if SMK or others would not come on the market for 4 years ?! what would happen ? >Not that easy. If you are a piece down in a bad position but your opponent gives >you the chance to draw by a perpetual, everyone will grab the chance and go for >the draw. the program looks if the draw can be forced from its point of view. if so, it has a joker if plan b is not working. this is how it works. plan A (force the draw) plan b try the attack. >On the other hand there are also positions you can easily play on knowing that >it is almost impossible to lose. > >Furthermore there are equal positions in which you know if you play for a win >you must throw all the security from board and go for 100% risk. In such >positions only fighters play on. ;-) yes. yes.
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.