Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 04:53:38 09/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2004 at 06:56:45, martin fierz wrote: >[snip] > >>>it's definitely not nonsense. i agree that the engine won't find a better (or >>>the best according to the book), but a weak engine will make real blunders in >>>the opening while a strong engine might just play a slightly inferior move. >> >>Strong engines don´t just play slightly inferior moves in the opening. >>They play often complete nonsense without book. >>I think we have discussed enough examples here in the past. > >of course - but you are guilty of selective perception. I´m not guilty of anything. I was referring to: "If the engine is strong enough to find better moves by itself then opening book is not needed". Engines generally won´t find better moves by itself than Top GMs in home preparation. No matter how strong they get. The opening book is needed as long as engines have no clue about long term strategies. Some simple development rules are not enough since there exist by far too many exceptions. you have noted the >examples discussed here. if you took 1000 opening positions from somewhere, and >looked which moves GMs play, i believe that strong engines would play the same >moves very often (ie. 80-95%). weak engines on the other hand... I also played 80-95% GM moves in the past. Unfortunately the 5-20% "non-GM moves" made the difference. Michael > >cheers > martin
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.