Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 17:25:41 05/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2004 at 18:55:16, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >On May 08, 2004 at 12:14:42, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>On May 08, 2004 at 11:51:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On May 08, 2004 at 10:50:57, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>> >>>>On May 08, 2004 at 07:18:27, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 08, 2004 at 04:34:40, Sune Fischer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>You are absulutely right. >>>>>>>>It is obvious that humans already solved chess so they know if a move is a >>>>>>>>blunder or not a blunder so you can be sure that all the question marks are >>>>>>>>correct. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It is also obvious that the number of mistakes is what decides the game so if >>>>>>>>your opponent did 2 mistakes you can let yourself to do one mistake like letting >>>>>>>>him to force mate and you are not going to lose. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>:_( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You know, Uri, I have never seen you do anything but post how other people are >>>>>>>wrong (never with any reasons of course). Many other people have noticed your >>>>>>>unending flood of negativity. It is difficult to consider this post as anything >>>>>>>other than a flame. It appears I am going to have to take off the kid gloves >>>>>>>and dispose of you. >>>>>> >>>>>>Isn't it natural to only post if you disagree? >>>>>> >>>>>>Anyway, I suspect Uri has a point. >>>>>>It's not unusual for computers to play "unatural" moves, just think of the >>>>>>Hedgehog Junior played against Kasparov. >>>>>> >>>>>>All the time the GM's were saying how strange Junior's moves were, how "it >>>>>>showed no understanding of the position" blah blah blah. >>>>>> >>>>>>So please explain why Kasparov suddenly had to fight for a draw after 10 >>>>>>questionmark moves from Junior! >>>>>> >>>>>>-S. >>>>> >>>>>I never thought this day would come - but I agree with Uri here. :-) >>>>> >>>>>Sports aren't about beautiful play. Sports are about winning. If someone is >>>>>playing ugly, and winning, then it's your sense of aesthetics which needs to be >>>>>reviewed. >>>>> >>>>>Computers have a long history of winning ugly. In the recent Fritz-Kasparov and >>>>>Junior-Kasparov matches, the machines made many many more "mistakes" (according >>>>>to human opinion) than Kasparov. But - if these mistakes aren't punished - are >>>>>they really mistakes? Is it a mistake to leave Shaq wide open for three point >>>>>shots? (Or send him to the line for "free" throws?) It's impossible to speak >>>>>about objectivity here. You can only look at the results. >>>>> >>>>>Vas >>>> >>>>Let's take a look at some of the moves the annotator didn't like: >>>> >>>>[D]r2q1rk1/pp1n1ppp/2pbpn2/3p3b/8/1P1PPNPP/PBPN1PB1/R2Q1RK1 b - - 0 10 >>>> >>>>Zappa plays the obvious 10 ...e5. Deep Blue played 10 ...h6. I won't call this >>>>a bad move, but it's clearly a pass move. >>> >>>That isn't very convincing. Did you look at _your_ PV? move 4? :) >>> >>>Order doesn't mean much to alpha/beta as it scores positions, not moves as they >>>are played. >>> >>>First impression is that h6 and e5 transpose to the _same_ position... >>> >>> >> >>I will accept that my 4 ply search plays pass moves some of the time :) Zappa >>uses pure R=3 now, and perhaps the evaluation isn't quite good enough for it. >> >>anthony > > > >In my opinion 10...h6 is not merely a pass move or waste of time. White may >plan to push the g-pawn to g4 and drive the black bishop to g6 aiming to >exchange his knight for the bishop later, playing the knight to h4. Thus >10...h6 gives black refuge. Besides, the bishop positioned at h7 would be very >useful later on, perhaps after the push you mentioned that Zappa plays right >away, exerting pressure on the e4 square... > >Just an idea. One glance at the diagram... Caveat emptor :-) I tend to agree with Seirawan on this matter more, after h6 you can resign here positionally with black.
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.