Author: Stephen Ham
Date: 09:52:32 04/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2004 at 21:12:40, Mark Ryan wrote: >On April 19, 2004 at 18:15:53, Stephen Ham wrote: > >>On April 19, 2004 at 16:17:37, Mark Ryan wrote: >> >>>Hi Stephen and others: >>> >>>Which chess engines are most likely to be used by correspondence chess players? >>>Which engines are used to check for tactical shots, which for positional play, >>>which for the endgame, which for opening theory? >> >>Hi Mark, >> >[snip] >>Mark, you asked about using an engine for opening theory. I'm not sure what you >>mean. Do you mean to say that one uses the engine to test book lines? If so, >>then I'd again speculate that engine use varies depending upon the nature of the >>position being tested. I've done this myself. I play the Dragon Sicilian as >>Black, but I don't think I'm a top-notch tactician. So I sometimes test my >>"TN's" against Shredder 8, just to see if there's any merit to my ideas. But >>while I like its calculating power in sharp positions, I never trust its >>evaluation. I always have to evaluate the position myself. >> >[snip] >>All the best, >>Stephen > >Actually I was thinking as follows: A chess player can study the "Encyclopedia >of Chess Openings", or "Modern Chess Openings" (MCO), or "Boris Badenuf's Sneaky >Opening Traps". Most chess engines have a unique opening book. Basically I was >wondering if any correspondence players find any chess engine's opening book >useful as a reference, in the same way that MCO might be useful. > >Mark Hi Mark, Gosh, I'd never thought of that. Personally I'd be VERY surprised if strong CC players use an engine's opening book for study. That's because my perception is that most strong CC players already have a very detailed reference library for their opening lines. Those who don't (e.g. theyr trying out a new line), probably wouldn't trust an engine's move unless they'd sone a lot of homework on it. Also, I seldom find "original" moves in engine opening books. Of those few original moves, are they any good? Since they were probably put into the engine's opening book by a person who's likely to be a weaker CC player than the master in question, then I doubt if the move would be given much merit, in and of itself. I don't mean to sound elitist, but please allow an illustration: Many strong CC players are playing several (too many!) CC games simultaneously. Time is always short. So given the vast amount of data out there (books, periodicals, internet, databases, etc.) one would tend to look in places for data where there's some degree of trust that theory and analysis have some degree of merit. This is especially true in CC, where moves that are OK in OTB play may not be suitable to the tougher rigors of CC. So finding a new move, entered into an engine's opening book by an unknown person of unknown strength and for unknown reasons, doesn't give one much confidence. That said, I can't imagine any strong CC player seeking out data in engine opening books. Instead, if a new move is found there in a position of interest, then the strong CC player may examine it, if sufficient time exists. That's my opinion anyway. Also, I've never heard of a strong CC player seeking out data in en engine's book. Why would they, when so many better sources for relaible exist? All the best, Stephen
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.