Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:53:11 07/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 10, 2005 at 17:29:55, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On July 10, 2005 at 16:32:28, Uri Blass wrote: >>I do not think that Fruit2.1 is simple. > >fruit fails in almost all sacrifice positions of the WM-test, as >werner schuele pointed out once... There is a lot of positional understanding that is not about sacrifices. Finding good sacrifices is productive only if the price is not finding too many bad sacrifices. I read in the winboard forum that Vincent Diepveen claimed that the problem of commercial programs against Fruit is that they often sacrifice and find no compensation for the sacrifice. The fact that Fruit does not find some good sacrifices does not prove that the evaluation of it is simple. 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.