Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:16:18 07/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 12, 2004 at 12:43:28, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On July 12, 2004 at 11:48:54, Volker Böhm wrote: > >>Bad to know to a chess patzer like me as I will never be able to write a really >>good chess engine :-( >> >>Greetings Volker > > >Oh no, you know, exceptions prove the Laws. Ausnahmen bestätigen die Regel. :)) Amir and stefan are not strong chess players so it is not needed to be a strong chess player in order to be number 1 or number 2. If the best that you can get by being a good chess player is being number 3 then maybe it is better not to be a strong chess player:( Seriously I do not think that being a good chess player is important for success in WCCC I do not think that it hurts so I do not think that strong chess players have no chance to get the first place. Being a strong chess player hurts only if you decide to write a big evaluation without testing but this problem is not only a problem of strong players. There are 2 reasons for programmers to write an expensive evaluation without testing in games if it is productive: 1)too much confidence(the programmer believes that he knows that it is productive) 2)The programmer is only an amateur and develops the program for fun and he does not care much about being better but about implementing what he wants to implement. Uri
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.