Author: Reinhard Scharnagl
Date: 01:00:47 03/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 15, 2005 at 03:51:34, Odd Gunnar Malin wrote: >On March 14, 2005 at 21:55:16, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>Will any of the leader of the SSDF programs be converted to play Chess960? such >>as Junior X or Shredder X ? >> >>http://www.chesstigers.org/en/Announcement.html > >I must confess that I fail to see a need for this game. >What I do if I get bored of some opening is to switch to another and a whole new >world opens up. >I have answer 1.e4 with 1...c6 for many years, but last year I got brave and >moved the c-pawn two square forward and now my black games against 1.e4 become >interesting and new again. >This was radical but I did a less radical switch in the 1.d4 opening with going >from Queen Indian to Bogo-Indian as an answer to 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 > >What is a game of chess? >A big part is to try to remember something you have learned/analysed, either by >looking it up in your memory like you do in the opening and endgame play, or >using your intuition (tactical training) to know where to calculate. Even in the >middlegame you use learned stuff. What should computerchess be? A competition in who has the biggest and fastest look up tables? That might be a challenge for humans and is of course part of the attraction of the game of chess between people. But more interesting is to find an optimal decision based on restricted knowledge, being creative in situations never seen before. This is (in my eyes) the more interesting part of the chess game, and it is, what makes computerchess programming interesting. Thus Chess960 matches the needs of computerchess much better than variant 518. Reinhard.
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.