Author: Vasik Rajlich
Date: 14:35:05 05/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2004 at 07:49:18, martin fierz wrote: >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 :-) > >hi vas, > >here's why ...h6 is wrong: just look what happens in the game: after Qe1 and >Nh4, white is threatening g3-g4 and after ...Bg6 Nxg6 fxg6 it's clear that black >has gone wrong. without ...h6 this just never happens, you just go back to g6 >and after Nxg6 recapture ...hxg6 with a solid position. that's why deep blue >went ...g5 later, which it had to do, else the abovementioned line happens. so >...g5 is not a blunder IMO, but before: Bc7 and Qa5 are ridiculous moves, doing >nothing at all. it could have played Bg6 before Qe1+Nh4, for example. or gone >for one of the standard plans with ....a5-a4 or e7-e5. all makes much more sense >than what was played. >i guess playing ...h6 and ...Bg6 is just a little slow compared to doing >something active, so i would also call ....h6 a mistake, but i'd call Bc7 and >Qa5 to be the real culprits here. > >cheers > martin For what it's worth - the game Junior 8-Shredder 7.04 from this position ended drawn - with black having a clear advantage most of the way. I'll post it with a new heading. Cheers, Vas
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.