Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Another nice position, and LGG 2.0 gets it (not Crafty 16.6 or CSTal

Author: José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba

Date: 10:17:56 05/16/99

Go up one level in this thread


On May 15, 1999 at 10:54:23, Francis Monkman wrote:

>
>On May 15, 1999 at 10:33:47, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>I consider a program to solve a tactical 'win' when (a) they produce a PV that
>>shows that they understood why the move was important and (b) the score shows
>>that the program understood how good (or bad) the move was.  But just picking
>>the "right" move is something that can happen for lots of reasons, totally
>>unrelated to playing strength.
>
>I think for a piece sacrifice to be reading above zero (in the time it takes
>LGG) means
>something -- also, that although it was not correct about the best line after
>about 7-ply, it certainly 'got the drift' -- coincidentally, very much in the
>manner being discussed just prior
>to this "The reason why etc". Surely it must be clear that NO program is going
>to throw away a knight 'for the wrong reason'?
>
>Francis

	Clearly there are programs that throw away pieces for the wrong reason. At
blitz with black Faile plays the following: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4.
Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6 8. Nb3 Nxe4?, and also 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4
Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d3 Bb4 5. Ne2 Nxe4?
	I have seen gnuchess making strange piece sacrifices too (I do not have them
right now). I am sure all programs in some stage of their development made poor
piece sacrifices.
José.



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.