Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 03:32:40 10/13/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 2004 at 06:06:52, emerson tan wrote: >Since computers can play much better than humans, [insert proof here] > the next team humans versus >team computers, computers should not use opening books. Many engines are designed in a way that they _depend_ on an opening book. That is, they don't have the necessary eval-terms to play a very good opening on their own. (similarly, engines which are programmed with EGTB in mind, don't have knowledge to play KPK endgames etc) One can argue whether that's a good thing or a bad thing. But that's the current situation. >Fischer mentioned before that he plays against computers with opening book >disabled cause the opening book is made by man. Maybe next time he should play against nothing, since the engine is also made by man. >Its also interesting to see how the computer navigate the opening using purely >engine. It is also interesting to see humans play against the computers which >does not play book and we will have an unfamiliar position in less than 10 >moves. While that may me interesting to us computer-chess freaks, it won't happen. All these human-computer events are not scientific experiments but public exhibitions. (nothing wrong with that) >Get rid of the tablebases also. The ability to tire on human part and the >ability to blunder is already a big disadvantage to humans. I guess EGTBs are overrated... besides... why should you penalize the engine because of a weakness of humans? It's not the engines fault that humans blunder at times. Sargon
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.