Author: Tony Nichols
Date: 03:01:31 04/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2005 at 05:51:29, Peter Berger wrote: >On April 22, 2005 at 03:39:06, Tony Nichols wrote: > >>The programs perform as well as they do because they are very good at tactics >>and most importantly they have huge opening books. I know this is a >>controversial topic but if we really want to test the strenght of programs, then >>have them play against strong humans without opening books. > >I consider the opening book of current top programs as one of their main >weaknesses, and I am surprised that this argument is so popular. > >Even a player of about 1800-2000 will often know (important) things about his >pet line he won't find in any computer opening book, not to talk about titled >players or grandmasters. And the books also contain blunders the program would >never play on its own. > >Opening books are still useful, but the opening book of an Anand, Kasparov or >Kramnik is something completely different. Hi, Peter This is a complex subject. On one hand opening books are a huge benefit to computers when playing against humans. Most of the time they keep the engines from getting a very bad middlegame. On the other hand bad book moves can kill the best engine. I personally can attest to not knowing anything about my pet lines:) Seriously, In my experience many masters play poor openings. So overall a book is definitely a benfit for computers. Regards Tony
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.