Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 03:49:54 02/26/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 25, 2004 at 14:37:03, Sune Fischer wrote: >On February 25, 2004 at 14:23:46, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On February 25, 2004 at 14:16:15, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>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. >> >>I really dont care for the reasons my engine has, as long as it's playing the >>right moves. >> >>If it's playing the wrong ones, then it's a time to care about reasons. > >I think there is a fundamental difference between "guessing" (eval) and >"knowing" (search), at least when it comes to tactical test suites. > >Of course if your eval is super tuned then guessing can almost be as accurate as >knowing :) So you still have no clue yet how much tactics gets solved by the commercial software by using eval. >>In this case, the reason for busting up the position is it deems white's >>king position as untenable. And I think that's the right reason, too. > >In _this case_ perhaps yes. > >Anyway, the material balance is nearly equal even after "the sac", it is >possible it should be viewed as an interesting exchange rather than a real sac. > >-S. > >>-- >>GCP
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.