Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:17:38 03/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 12, 2004 at 12:59:24, Jonathan Kreuzer wrote: >I'm not saying it's pretty easy to return a winning score from the root >position. That would be indeed be near impossible and wasteful. I'm saying if >you turn up the contempt for draw in a program, I assumed most would play the >same winning moves as Slow Chess, despite starting out with a negative >evaluation for its position like Slow does. Are you saying I'm wrong about this? I do not know and I did not say it. >(I didn't test this with other programs so I may be.) > >(Also the mate threat I mentioned was from a human analysis point of view... if >black moves his queen anywhere that it can't be captured instantly it's mate. >It's true from a computer point of view Slow doesn't extend these 'mate threats' >at all.) Zugzwang is not a threat. There is a clear definition for the term threat. I also do not think that it is easy to find for humans with a lot of experience in games but not in solving studies. They will probably reject moves like Qd3 as illogical and are not going to extend them. There are many lines with checks and extending a line with no check and no immediate threat when the opponent does nothing is not the way that humans think. 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.