Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 08:29:00 04/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 1999 at 13:09:44, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On April 14, 1999 at 12:15:35, KarinsDad wrote: > >>I couldn't have said it much better. The software I am working on has many of >>the elements that you describe. How well it will work is yet to be determined. >> >>However, one other vast area of improvement that I foresee is the endgame. >>Having tablebases is fine, however, a tablebase is no different than a typical >>player's slight endgame knowledge (the tablebase is just normally more >>complete). Once programs really understand endgame concepts, I think that their >>level of play will improve dramatically. > >Endgame databases help in specific very low material situations. These >situations come up, but there is usually a lot of endgame play before they come >up. > >Sometimes they can help in situations with slightly more material. An example >is KRPP vs KR, where the pawns are on the a- and c-files. This ending can be >hard to handle, but the KRP vs KR table lets the program understand the >consequences of exchanges, which are critical in this case. I've had either >side of this come up, and I've been satisfied with the result. > >There are plenty of endings where endgame databases have no bearing on the >outcome. > >People often talk about the ending as a place to add sophisticated knowledge, >but I've never heard an example. > >bruce M Chess
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.