Author: Uri Blass
Date: 11:20:50 02/25/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 25, 2004 at 14:16:15, Sune Fischer wrote: >On February 25, 2004 at 13:49:05, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On February 24, 2004 at 16:10:12, Darren Rushton wrote: >> >>>[D]2rq1rk1/pb1pn1pp/1p2p3/2pn1p2/3P2P1/P1PBPN1P/1P1NQP1R/1K1R4 b - - 0 15 >>> >>>Alterman - Deep Sjeng >>> >>> >>>Deep Sjeng is the only software which finds 15...Nxc3+!! >> >>The exact same thing has been posted at least 2 times before already. >> >>When I wrote this, Deep Sjeng 1.0 was current, and none of the professionals >>or best amateurs could find the move in a short amount of time. It's now about >>1 year later and other people have improved too, so some other programs can >>also find it reasonably quickly. >> >>Deep Sjeng 1.5/1.6 are actually a bit slower than 1.0 on this position. >> >>I left the position there because it's still indicative of Deep Sjeng's style. >> >>And for the ones wondering, the sacrifice is 100% correct and crushing, just >>analyze a bit further :) > >Actually the point isn't so much whether it is crushing or not, the point is >that the right move may be played for the wrong reasons. > >The move might be good (objectively speaking forcing a win) but to be sure of >that you need a fairly deep calculation, way too deep to be found in 1 second. > >When an engine makes the right move for the wrong reasons it is always cause for >concern, IMO. > >Bottom line it is a matter of "style", not tactical abilities, hence I'm not >sure I'd consider it a good test position. > >-S. I do not see where GCP said that it is a good test position. from gcp's words in the post you reply to: "I left the position there because it's still indicative of Deep Sjeng's style." 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.