Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:51:49 05/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 14, 1999 at 17:33:38, Francis Monkman wrote: > >On May 14, 1999 at 16:54:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>Just looking at what you posted, this appears to be a case of a program >>coming up with a random move for the wrong reason. IE the eval of +.23 is >>not exactly 'winning'. And while the moves from CSTal/Crafty might not win >>either, what makes Rad1 a winner? And if it does, do you _really_ want a >>program that will play such a move without having a clue why it is playing >>it? > >Sorry Bob, but this is specious. LGG obviously has a good 'clue' as to the >winning line. >> >>My opinion is that there are probably several reasonable moves here, none are >>outright winning or losing... > >You'll appreciate I did some extensive analysis on this, but I'll pass it on to >those > better qualified than I, as you insist. (If anyone still has any doubts about >the last one >I posted, it was deemed an outright winner by two top GMs.) > >Francis That's not my point. I have watched LGG play many games on ICC. I have seen it have an eval of +1.5 when it is losing, or +1.5 when material is dead even and it has no huge positional edge. So what is convincing about an eval of +.23? It obviously doesn't see that this is 'winning'. Which means it it playing that move for some "other" reason. Most likely totally unrelated to what happens assuming this is a tactical win...
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.