Author: Pablo Ignacio Restrepo
Date: 03:50:11 03/01/06
Go up one level in this thread
On March 01, 2006 at 02:36:30, Peter Skinner wrote: >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 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.