Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:28:51 01/25/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2006 at 18:23:50, Christopher Conkie wrote: >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. Of course, a gambit-free book is not necessarily a safer book. Just because it is not in your book does not mean an opponent won't throw one at you. A thorny problem, to be sure.
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.