Author: Will Singleton
Date: 15:28:26 03/18/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 18, 1999 at 17:17:46, James B. Shearer wrote: >On March 17, 1999 at 10:04:37, odell hall wrote in part: > >> ... In my opinion many humans consider chess programs to be boring because >>they cannot get the same tactical opportunities against programs as against >>humans. Computer are notorious for stamping out any tactical possibilities >>before they materialize. ... > > I think this is more or less the reverse of the truth. Computers are >notorious for ignoring tactical possibilities which have not yet materialized >(are beyond their search horizon). So a computer up two pawns with an easy win >will go grab a third pawn on the queenside and get mated on the kingside because >the mate was beyond its search horizon. A human does not have to actually see >the mate to decide that descretion is indicated. > James B. Shearer James, Depends on the program, cpu, time control. While you have beaten my prog that way, wouldn't be the same story vs the quad crafty. Most times. Wil
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.