Author: Harald Faber
Date: 11:08:10 02/04/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2004 at 13:17:20, Thorsten Czub wrote: >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. Risky. Often too risky. Because in 99% such sacs do not work when your calculation is not precise enough. And in those 99% the defender finds the winning rescue if there is one. >you have a thesis and you try it out. Depends on my self-confidence, my chess skills, my temper and my experience... >the better your thesis, the more often it will work. The more accurate your calculation is... >it worked for cstal against genius and shredder. How often? ;-) >so you can win without proving that it works. Sure, you can sac like mad, when your opponent plays even worse you still win. This is not how *I* like chess. >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 ? Tell me. :-)
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.