Author: Pablo Ignacio Restrepo
Date: 19:36:41 11/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hello James I am 100% agree with your poste and your analisis. Thanks Pablo On November 20, 2005 at 12:17:53, James T. Walker wrote: >On November 20, 2005 at 10:27:27, chandler yergin wrote: > >>The Topic is about the Sac. The Negative PV Eval shows it was not good. >>Thank you for proving a point. On previous threads some Programmers have >>stated that it not necessary to take a position to Mate; that a High PV >>Eval is sufficient to prove there is a Win. Also stated was that they had >>never seen an Eval over + or - (5.xx) where there was not a win. >>This game is just one more example where this is not true. > >About the eval, I have seen a program with a +10 score end with a draw. I think >it was Chess Tiger 14 but since I have almost 3000 games with CT14 in my >database I'm not going to try to find it. >People who say "I've never seen ....." should realize there are many more >things they have never seen than they have actually seen. It means nothing just >because they have never seen it. >By the way. Yes the topic is about the sac but in light of it's purpose it was >good not bad. It allowed Pablo to save a draw vs a much higher rated player. >In my opinion this type of game helps point out weakness of computers that may >eventually be fixed. I'm sure it's not a high priority for programmers since >they can be more productive in improving their programs in other areas. One day >programs will be able to break up this type of defense with a sac of their own >which leads to a win. In most instances now they simply can't see far enough >ahead to break it. >Jim
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.