Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Thinker 4.6b third after 1st round!

Author: Sune Fischer

Date: 01:52:32 06/01/04

Go up one level in this thread


On June 01, 2004 at 04:45:12, José Carlos wrote:

>On June 01, 2004 at 04:39:10, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>On June 01, 2004 at 04:04:57, José Carlos wrote:
>>
>>>On June 01, 2004 at 03:44:59, Sune Fischer wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 01, 2004 at 03:27:37, José Carlos wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's a very powerful feature, too powerful IMO if not all engines have it.
>>>>>>I'm quite sure even Ruffian would lose 10-90 if Crafty had aggressive learning
>>>>>>and Ruffian just used a small book without learning.
>>>>>>You can be of the opinion that's a fair result, I think it is pure nonsense.
>>>>>>Granted, it demonstrates that Crafty has learning that works, but what other
>>>>>>conclusions can you hope to draw from it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  I disagree but I think we can agree that it's a matter of taste. IMO, Ruffian
>>>>>has a very good selective search. Using your reasoning, we could say "if Ruffian
>>>>>beats Crafty we can draw the conclusion that Ruffian has a much better selective
>>>>>search, but the result is not fair, it should use only null move. Otherwise, the
>>>>>comparison is nonsense". :)
>>>>
>>>>Yesterday I played a few games on fics against a Crafty clone, I think it was
>>>>already game 5 where Crafty managed to repeat a won game.
>>>>I was very close to resigning already at move 10, the position was not lost at
>>>>that point but I knew the game would be of course.
>>>>
>>>>More importantly, where is the _fun_ in that, why even play the game?
>>>>Who in the world gets a kick out of seeing the same games over and over?
>>>>
>>>>-S.
>>>
>>>  In my opinion, the fun is exactly in figuring out an algorithm to avoid that
>>>Crafty clone beating you twice with the same line. Don't you think it is fun to
>>>be smarter than a smart opponent?
>>>
>>>  José C.
>>
>>No I prefer to focus on the algorithms and evaluation.
>>
>>Book learning is "fake elo", you only cheat yourself into thinking the engine is
>>better than it really is.
>>
>>-S.
>
>  Human elo is also "fake elo" by that reasoning.

Yes it is in a way, IMO.
It's hard to prevent with humans of course, the solution could be FRC :)

> To me, chess is much more than
>search and evaluation. To you, it isn't.

To me chess is so much more than memorizing book lines.
To you this is the main thing.

>  Ok, that's your opinion and I repect it.

Ditto :)

-S.
>  José C.



This page took 0.02 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.