Author: Derek Paquette
Date: 13:18:22 09/02/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 01, 2005 at 21:43:57, Tony Nichols wrote: >On September 01, 2005 at 21:25:48, Derek Paquette wrote: > >>On September 01, 2005 at 19:17:56, Tony Nichols wrote: >> >>>Hello George, >>> I am not a programmer, but I definitley believe there is a difference between >>>beating other programs and beating human players. All chess engines are strong >>>in tactics. Many GM games are lost just because a player missed a tactic. If you >>>design your program to value tactical positions it would probably do better >>>against humans. However, Against other programs this would not be the best way >>>to win. Other programs would very often handle the tactics well and then what >>>have you got? It's funny to hear the statement from chessbase that their >>>concentrating on beating human GM's. This might have been an interesting goal 10 >>>years ago. Today amatuer programs are beating GM's, So what is chessbase really >>>saying? They also claim that their trying to make Fritz more of an instructive >>>tool. I am all for this, But they don't really say how. >>>Regards >>>Tony >>> >>>P.S. I of course will buy Fritz 9 as soon as it comes out:) >> >>There is no evidence for this however, HiarcsX (hiarcs9) are argueable the >>strongest positional programs and hiarcs couldn't even win a single game vs >>Bareev who didn't have an army of grandmasters plotting his moves ahead of time >>for him. >> >>It couldn't come up with the win in my opinion because it simply was not strong >>enough. >> >>6 games is a lot of games to get atleast ONE win > >Based on my experience as a chessplayer, I have seen many human games lost >because of tactics. Even at the highest level. If a program was designed to play >for highly tactical positions it would surely get good results. Your right I >have no proof other than the 1,000's of games lost because of tactical >oversights. > You can't win a game of chess unless your opponent makes a mistake. Good >players know what types of mistakes their opponent is prone to make. Humans make >tactical mistakes more than any other kind. If you want your chess program to >beat humans, Then play tactical positions. This seems self evident to me. >Regards >Tony You know that does make a lot of sense, however I would like to add if you create an all around program that can beat programs at a top level (toga, zappa, fruit, shredder) then they inevitably know how to play a tactical game aswell as a positional game, so when the human makes a mistake it is likely they will be able to take advantage of it.
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.