Author: Joseph Ciarrochi
Date: 02:30:50 12/17/05
My question is: to what extent do engines vary in strength depending on the opening type 9e.g., highly strategic versus highly tactical). There are alot of assumptions about some programs being highly strategic and others being tactical. I would love to see the evidence for these programs being better at certain openings, and worse at others (and you really need a basement full of computers to do this test). I am only about an 1800 player, so what i'm about to say might be off, but.....It seems to me that tactics and strategy are inexorably linked. Good strategic programs like rybka seem to utilize strategic knowledge to increase the chance of a tactical shot. So you seem to have two key factors here: 1) the likihood of detecting a tactic (given a certain amount of time) and 2) the liklihood of creating a position where a tactic appears. If you test a program in terms of speed to detect a tactic, you are estimating factor 1 but not factor 2. Given the inexorable link between tactics and strategy, are there really programs that are good at closed, strategic positions, but not so good at open tactical positions, and vice versa? Surely the amount of games in the CEGT would allow you to test this possibility? best Joseph
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.