Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Most brilliant novelty from cct7 Witchess-Arasan

Author: Arturo Ochoa

Date: 16:38:12 02/14/05

Go up one level in this thread

On February 14, 2005 at 19:18:58, Peter Berger wrote:

>On February 14, 2005 at 18:57:07, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>Well, if you think that Uri´s posting are not ludicrous, we are alll entering in
>>the absurd world of Uri. That is. It is a waste of time to repeat again and
>>again in this Forum, that a book tuned for a specific engine is a bid advantage
>>against other program or a GM.
>I am afraid that the absurd world of Uri is the one I am living in too.
>There are three kinds of opening books:
>a.) no book
>b.) random book
>c.) optimized book
>b.) should be the worst selection here for a strong engine, worse than a.), but
>it might be hard to prove, and it will not apply to all lines.
>c.) will outscore b.) much worse of course IMHO. That's the best choice against
>the worst.
>Trouble (or art?) is to determine how to do c.) . In the past this was hard,
>hard work, requiring much patience , thousands of moves to be entered in the
>book, but maybe this kind of opening book has some disadvantages by now. For me
>this seems to be Uri's major point, and I think it is a valid one.

Well, I wont reveal how to do it because I dont want to reveal how Diep was
prepared in 2004 as well as Zappa in 2005.

I see you work with Crafty as a bright work. I dont want to know how you did it.

>To improve on the engine's own choice it is not enough to just enter moves into
>opening books or to do some blundercheck. Think of the Kramnik-Leko Marshall
>game - this could have been played at a computerchess event too.

No, I have my own method of book testing and build debugging that I won´t reveal

>The interesting challenge would be to run a highly optimized opening book
>against one generated from a random source with maybe 20-50 changes altogether -
>is it really clear who would win this challenge ?

I have done it before and I got a remerkable difference in the score. Think what
the tested engine was ;)

>There might be two or three book authors (the famous guys) who go beyond, have
>gotten rid of all automated lines (important!) and are competing with the
>grandmasters themselves with the help of the engines now. But from what I can
>see nearly all still start from some automated base, and this has become a major
>reliability by now.

I am not saying that I am the best booker on the earth. I am only saying that
the theory of the no books sucks and will suck. That is.

>It's a bit late - hope the general idea still transports.

Not really. It is  presmise already debated previously. It doesnt provide a new
light about the thopic. Sorry.


This page took 0.06 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.