Author: Laurence Chen
Date: 15:49:48 02/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 23, 1999 at 17:04:46, odell hall wrote: >Hi CCC > > Recently a friend and I decided to play a friendly six game match between his >rebel10(amd233 64megs), and my Hiarcs6 (Cyrix233 16megs). Unfortunately what >started out a friendly compitition turned into quite a heated argument. My >friend has what I believe to be a rediculous notion that computers should not >play with opening books. After a debate about the pro's and con's off playing >computer vs computer chess with/without books on we decided on a small >compromise. Our compromise was that after our computers reached move 10, in our >game we would then turn the books off, so that white on his 11th move would be >playing on it's own without assistance from a book. My friends main reason's >for not wanting a book are that he thinks: 1. It is not a true test of a >programs strength when it plays with a book 2. How well a program plays the >opening is part of it's chess strength 3.Games tend to be boring with the books >on. My position in defense of opening books is that if we leave off the book >then we ignore a part of the program. It almost like saying that I as an A >player would be better than a Master if I could negate his Memory! Much of the >dispute stems from my friend trusting the computers evaluation of a opening >position out of book over Centuries of Human expierence and Learning! I think >the reason computers are given opening books is because they do not understand >the opening and need guidance. Anyway the dispute started over game 4 of our >match where Hiarcs6 as white made his first non-book move, In keeping in the >spirit of our agreement I tourned my hiarcs book off at this position > > >r1bqkb1r/5p1p/p1np4/1p1Npp2/4P3/N7/PPP2PPP/R2QKB1R w KQkq - id HIARCS - rebel 10 >and233 gam; bm e4f5; > > >here hiarcs played 11. exf5 on it's own without book assistance. Glancing out >rebel10 evaution of the position (-74) my friend was hot and wanted to start the >game all over! He felt that it was unfair! I take issue with this because this >is a very well known opening position and is theoritically equal, although it is >possible that a computer program would not understand it at all (Exactly whty it >is absolutely neccessary for computers to have books!) Anyway rebel completely >mishandled the position to lose horribly here is the complete game. > > >[Event "?"] >[Site "?"] >[Date "??.??.????"] >[Round "?"] >[White "HIARCS"] >[Black "rebel 10 and233 gam"] >[Result "*"] >[WhiteElo "?"] >[BlackElo "?"] >[ECO "B33"] > >1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bg5 >a6 8. Na3 b5 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Nd5 f5 11. exf5 b4 12. Nc4 Bxf5 13. Bd3 Be6 >14. Qf3 Bxd5 15. Qxd5 Rc8 16. f4 Qh4+ 17. g3 Qd8 18. O-O-O b3 19. axb3 >Nb4 20. Qb7 Rb8 21. Qa7 Ra8 22. Qe3 * > > > > > >Who is Right? I am saying that the game was completely fair and Rebel loss in a >well known theoretically equal position. His position was that the Game should >have been started over after move eleven because Rebel's opening book put it at >a handicap I believe from my observations of games played by Rebel, it needs help from opening books. Rebel chess tends to play badly without its opening books, and get into "bad" positions. This observation was made from the match played by J. Walker between CM5500 and Rebel 10, and Rebel lost the 10 game match quite badly because CM 5500 played moves which took Rebel out of the book quite early. So your friend argument is pointless. It is like saying that GM should not prepare their openings against their opponents, it is the fine understanding of the chess openings which gives the GM an edge over their fellow chess masters, not memorization of opening moves or variations. Some chess engines will play better than other chess engines without opening books, so to play matches without opening books is not a good idea. I believe that the true strength of a chess engine is the ability to stir the game towards a position in which it excells truly. The moral is never fall in love with a particular engine, but use the engine as tools to help or to improve one's understanding of the game. Let the engine be our guide not our master.
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.