Author: Christopher Conkie
Date: 15:23:50 01/25/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2006 at 15:19:20, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 25, 2006 at 13:03:36, Christopher Conkie wrote: > >>What would you say is the fairest method of testing an opening book? Is there a >>way to bench mark a book? Also, would you say that specific opening centric >>books are better for computer play, rather than books that include most >>openings? Say for example, a system based on near universal openings for like >>the KIA/Modern. What if an opening book (and or an engine) were made to play >>openings that were hypermodern? Would that mean improved results against the >>majority of engines which assume the centre of the board is everything or not? >> >>I lied......there are at least 5 questions here. >> >>;-) >> >>What are your thoughts on these things? Any answer on any part of this would be >>nice. > >Generally, chess programs stink (big time) in gambits, unless the book pulls >them past the places where the bad decisions can be made. > >If you put a gambit into your book, you should ensure that either you get past >the potential pitfalls or your engine understands the position. Yes gambits are a major problem. I was thinking of making a detailed KIA tree. It don't make for exciting chess (more often than not) but might make solid chess. Christopher
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.