Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Are engines 2006 really strong enought ? Rybka in troubles again...

Author: Peter Skinner

Date: 23:36:30 02/28/06

Go up one level in this thread


On March 01, 2006 at 01:08:22, Vikrant Malvankar wrote:

>Why should he do it? If Engine dont include the code to beat his style of Chess,
>they are incomplete and not GM levels since Gm definitely know how to beat his
>style of Chess.It is upto Chess Engines 'the so called tactics Masters' to see
>the strategical implications of a blocking move to understand  the resulting
>blocked positions which simply the Engines fail to see since they are not Human
>and they just simulate Chess, So if an Engine can Simulate Chess why cant an
>Human (Pablo)?

Playing SPAUYGADOWOT chess is not simulating clasical chess. Computers PLAY
classical chess. What he is playing is a cross between shuffle board and chess
until the 50 move rule or the engine loses on time to stop the game. Nothing
more.

This does not make an engine incomplete, nor does it made the engine non-GM
strength. It simply means that the engine does not support the SPAUYGADOWOT
variant of chess.

I hope you are not seriously going to argue that since Pablo can play this
"style" of chess against most engines, they are not GM strength?

Try this against Gambit Tiger with anti-human on or Crafty and you find out
quickly this pawn blocking routine doesn't work all that well. This is probably
why he can't do it against Crafty like it can with other programs.

Christophe purposely put code in Tiger to stop players on the servers from
playing this "brand" of chess and winning on time.

Peter



This page took 0.01 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.