Author: chandler yergin
Date: 12:06:46 11/26/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 26, 2005 at 12:45:10, Dagh Nielsen wrote: >On November 26, 2005 at 12:02:23, chandler yergin wrote: > >>Also, this way I won't leave anyone out >>;) >>Please understand I am a Player only I don't use Playchess, >>nor do I Program. I use Chessbase & Software to help me improve my game. >>So my 'perspective' is from this viewpoint only. I am not familiar with >>many of your Programming terms, so please cut me some slack. >>You Gentlemen are Master Players & Programmers. >>Question on Opening Books. >>Many play On-Line and do testing of Engine vs Engine etc. >>Is it not the purpose or goal to have the strongest Opening Book possible? >>If so, why do many make & play their own shallow opening books? >>Using Mega99 Database it is easy to Drag & Drop into the Standard Opening >>Book that comes with the Program, Truncating the games 20 moves beyond >>the ECO Classification. Install Opening Key and you have up to date >>Opening Theory. You also have over 56,000 Opening Key ECO Classifications. >>What am I missing here? >>Thanks in advance for your thoughts & comments, >>Chan >> >> >> >> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >I'm not a top programmer, but an engine player on playchess with a customized >book. The short answer why I don't do as you suggest is that it will not give a >very good book. Some problems: > >1) GM games are far from flawless. >2) There is more to opening theory than what has been played or published. A >book like yours will play variations that are just bad and that my engine >opponents know how to beat. >3) Engines don't play one of the colors very well in some kind of positions >(positions that GMs can play well). You would want to avoid these variations. >4) Compared to known and published opening theory, there are many, many new and >equally good moves deep in the different variations, moves that your engine >opponents will find and prepare. Hence, you would want to prepare your book more >thoroughly than just "published theory" in whatever variations you play, so that >you are not outprepared by the opponent's homework. > >So instead of your suggested approach, I manually tune and expand my book. This >does not give me a shallow book, on the contrary, I often play games where I do >not leave book until 10 or more moves out of "known" opening theory. > >In a sense, engine book cookers are opening researchers. That research can >easily improve on known theory, and hence the benefit of doing it this way. > >Regards, >Dagh Nielsen Excellent! Thank you very much! Do you have any recent games where either you/and/or Engine Opponent have changed settings from the Default condition that you could Post for me? Also, perhaps, and I don't want you to spend a lot of time on it, just a quick preview as to why the settings were changed? Thanks again, & Best Regards Chan
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.