Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:57:01 04/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2005 at 09:08:02, Mathieu Pagé wrote: >On April 22, 2005 at 05:46:30, Tony Nichols wrote: > >>I didn't say it was cheating. I just think that if we want to know the true >>strength of programs we should eliminate the opening books. > >And if we really want to know the speed of a formula 1 car we should remove is >engine and ask the pilot to tush the car ? > >Opening book is part of the chess engine as the engine is part of the formula >one car. > >If I ever released my engine, I'll code some routines avoiding him to play >without is book, so no one will be able to make him play without it, maybe then >they will realise that it is an not optional part of it. In this case less people will buy or download your engine. having less options to use the engine is a disadvantage and not an advantage. > >Same thing for the learning by the way. I remember someone telling here that he >was testing crafty without learning and Dr Hyatt told him he was not really >testing Crafty, but "Crafty without learning". I share this opinion. > >Mathieu Pagé People have the right to test what they like and I see no reason to prevent people to test Crafty without learning or even Crafty without a knight by giving it opening position when the knight b1 is missing and playing with it against other programs. 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.