Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The Need for Fischer Random Chess !

Author: Ricardo Gibert

Date: 18:25:26 06/06/04

Go up one level in this thread


On June 05, 2004 at 15:09:32, Anthony Cozzie wrote:

>On June 05, 2004 at 13:39:54, Russell Reagan wrote:
>
>>On June 05, 2004 at 12:19:27, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>Even if you know nothing about go except the rules...
>>
>>Which rule set am I supposed to use? I decided to write a Go program once, but
>>after a little investigation, I decided not to because there are different rule
>>sets. It is not a big deal, but it is enough headache to keep me with computer
>>chess.
>>
>>There are other games I find more interesting than computer chess, but the
>>computer chess community has so much more to offer. We have standards for data
>>and communication protocols. There are hundreds of engines we can play against,
>>all automated of course, on your home computer, or on the internet. Any amateur
>>programmer can have his engine run in any number of nice, commercial quality
>>GUIs by only knowing how to use printf().
>>
>>I wrote an amazons program once, and I wondered if there were any data standards
>>or protocols like we have in chess, so I asked around. Here is one response.
>>
>>"Nothing whatsoever.
>>There isn't even consensus about
>>- what to call an amazon/piece/queen,
>>- what to call a shot/throw/block/arrow,
>>- whether first player is red/white/black,
>>- which move notations are acceptable and recommended,
>>- how to score endgames without playing on until death,
>>- how to score the final score,
>>- how to deal with first player's advantage."
>>
>>Games that can't make guarentees are not very interesting to me at this point,
>>because I have a game that does make guarentees, chess. It is not likely that
>>the way chess is played will change. We may have FRC and other things become
>>more popular, but chess will still be chess.
>>
>>Maybe I would compute the equivalent of endgame tablebases for Go or Amazons,
>>but then they only work in one rule set for Go, and the rules for scoring in one
>>Amazons tournament might be different than the rules for scoring in another, so
>>I can't use them. Or maybe I create a huge opening database for Amazons, but the
>>tournament I want to enter uses the "flip rule" where the second player can
>>either play his own move or take the move of the first player on the very first
>>move, which changes the strategy completely. Why waste my time when I have
>>chess?
>
>1. A quick glance at Go and I think a endgame tablebase for go would be
>impossible.  I could be wrong.

Perhaps not tablebases, but many types of endgames can be mathematically solved,
which apparently outperfroms both bruteforce search and expert play:

http://math.berkeley.edu/~berlek/cgt/gobook.html

>
>2. I thought the rules for Go were standard (and very simple) except for the
>komi.
>
>3. My entire experience with Go is watching a few friends play and watching a
>bit of Hikaru no Go.
>
>anthony



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.