Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:23:59 12/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 2004 at 23:58:56, chandler yergin wrote: >On December 29, 2004 at 13:06:29, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>Let me spell this out for you. >> >>1. People in this forum (for whatever reason) care about the chess playing >>ability of computers. > >So do I! It's a great tool... > >>2. The ultimate arbiter of chess playing ability is winning games against other >>players, be they human or computers. >> >>3. Therefore, we hold programs that win long matches and tournaments to be the >>best, and if Program A beats Program B in a 200 game match, we conclude that A >>plays better chess than B. > >understanably so.. > >>4. In a game of chess, one can only play one move. >> >>5. The computer will play the one move that has the highest score. > >When there are 3 PV's with the same eval... (in a non-forcing position) >which move will be played? The one that the computer choose in one mode. It is also not relevant here because the moves had not the same evaluation. > >Don't know do you? > > >> >>6. Thus, the other moves that the computer considers are completely irrelevant. >> >>The point is: considering a move means NOTHING. Playing a move means >>EVERYTHING. >> >>anthony > >My comment concerns "Test Positions" which are often given here.... >I see the Main PV scrolled... and after hours sometimes, the Computer >does not go to the "Best" move. When you have it 'locked' on the one >PV it Scrolls that Variation! You'll never know what the true eval is or what >the Best Move IS. I will know what it is going to play after hours and it is the only thing that people who use one mode care about. If the discussion about it does not interest you then you can decide not to participate in the discussion but please do not destroy the discussion again and again by discussing about what people do not want to discuss and generating annoying noise. > >Example: > >Using Multiple Lines.. >Analysis by Shredder 8: > >1. ± (1.02): 1...Qd6 2.Re1 Qb6 3.Qc2 Bd7 4.Rad1 exd5 5.exd5 Rfe8 6.Bf3 e4 7.Nxe4 >Nxe4 8.Bxe4 Qxb2 9.Qxb2 Bc3 >2. ± (1.11): 1...exd5 2.exd5 Ne8 3.f3 Nd6 4.Bf2 Bf5 5.Qa4 Qe8 6.Qb4 Qd7 7.Rfe1 >Rfc8 8.Rad1 Bf8 9.Bc5 b6 10.Qh4 >3. ± (1.26): 1...Ne8 2.Qb3 exd5 3.Nxd5 Nd6 4.f3 Be6 5.Rad1 f5 6.Qa3 Rf7 >4. +- (1.41): 1...Nxe4 2.Nxe4 exd5 3.Nc5 f5 4.f3 b6 5.Nb3 Bb7 6.Rc1 Rc8 7.Qd3 e4 >8.Qd2 Rxc1 >5. +- (1.44): 1...Qc7 2.Rc1 Bd7 3.Qb3 Rfc8 4.Rfd1 Rab8 5.Qb4 a5 6.d6 axb4 7.dxc7 >Rxc7 8.Bxe5 bxc3 9.Bxc7 > >Now, if I have Scroll active; it will scroll the PV 1...Qd6 >and not overwrite with the best move. (check the Manual) >Playing is one thing... of course you have to rely on what it considers >the best move, that's programmed in. > >For Test Positions, or "ANY" position for that matter, 'understanding' >the position is what is important for the human. No You insist to discuss about things that the posters are not interested in discussing. Please stop it. The discussion is about the question if engine can play some move. You can also discuss also about the question if the move is the best move(it is not clear if Nxe4 is best) but you do neither of these things and the fact that engines can show Nxe4 as one of the best options does not tell me nothing because it can still be best move or not best move). There are 2 interesting questions: 1)What is the best move? 2)What move computers play? The fact that computers consider Nxe4 as an option in 4 option mode tell me nothing about these questions so I do not find it interesting. >Multiple PV's in parallel, and simultaneously provide that insight. > >It is also very insightful when reviewing games.. >you will discover the Computer does not always play the best move.. Of course computer does not always the best move (otherwise people could solve chess) It is no news. 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.