Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: LOL ROFL :-)

Author: Steve Glanzfeld

Date: 14:38:52 06/19/05

Go up one level in this thread

On June 19, 2005 at 16:50:57, Gabor Szots wrote:

>On June 19, 2005 at 15:37:23, Robert Hollay wrote:
>>On June 19, 2005 at 13:25:49, Steve Maughan wrote:

>>>>No. EGTB's do not increase the knowledge of the engine. They are simply like
>>>>vocabularies or lexicons.

>>>You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.  If an engine doesn't know
>>>how to mate with B+N+K v K and you implement / copy the EGTB it will "know" how
>>>to mate.

>>I am a poor chess player and probably couldn't mate a GM with B+N+K v K.
>>But if somebody tell me what to move in each position,
>>would be my "chess knowledge" increased? I don't think so.
>Exactly. I even know of a chess programmer who believes (at least once said so)
>that using EGTB's is cheating.

Don't ignore the fundamental hardware differences between humans and comps! :-))

So, different concepts have to be applied most often, to reach the same goals.
Tablebases represent the purest, most perfect chess knowledge on earth!

When tablebases would be cheating when a chess program uses them, then reading
and learning from an Averbakh endgame book would be cheating when a human player
does it:

BOTH access and use knowledge they haven't created themselves.

This is mankind's secret of success: Don't reinvent the wheel every day (or once
every 10.000 years)...


This page took 0.02 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.