Author: chandler yergin
Date: 03:54:26 12/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 2004 at 04:23:59, Uri Blass wrote: >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. The Computer plays under a Time Control! I know of NO Tournament unless it's Correspondence Chess that allows "Hours" of thinking time. Do You? So, your comment is irrelevant! > >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. Speak for YOURSELF! ONLY! This is a Forum, and YOU are NOT the BOSS! Get it? If you're not interested in my input stop reading it, and making inane & irrelevant comments. >> >>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 don't think Human players are interested in "understanding" positions? Finding the truth in a position? DUMB attitude! >You insist to discuss about things that the posters are not interested in >discussing. As I said,, You are NOT the Boss..so Stop your Crap! >Please stop it. NO! You stop your nonsense > >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. How sad... but then I don't find you interesting either. For a 'player' it tells a lot; it should tell you something. > >>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.