Author: jefkaan
Date: 08:39:36 05/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
well for such playing (comp-comp without book) you would need more tuning of the eval in the opening phase; or playing the set of Nunn test positions. why not, search/endgame (also *with* egtb) is more important than book. makes some sense i would say, but.. a GM or better, super_GM usually has quite a good memory, and a book for a comp fulfils this job. That's the use of eg. a database like CAP, it functions better after minimax, provided the end evals are good enough, and then you can improve on your repertoire. so againk, 'backsolving' is not nonsense, i disagree with the way KompKorner is expressing himself, but then on the other hand, its importance probably is being over-estimated. Take for example correspondence chess games, in such top-level games sometimes interesting novelties are found, and unless they are in your database, backsolving will not give the best opening strategy per definition. But it will after a while, some more hundred years or so, i guesss.. Jef
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.