Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 21:47:02 06/07/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 1999 at 21:22:45, Mike Castañuela wrote: >On June 07, 1999 at 19:08:42, Dave Gomboc wrote: > > > >>On June 07, 1999 at 16:41:56, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On June 07, 1999 at 16:35:24, blass uri wrote: >>>[snip] >>>>In part of these 7% of the cases(including your 3 examples) underpromotion is >>>>needed only to win faster but is not important practically for the result of the >>>>game. >>>The same would be true of a program that takes a bishop to go up +3 instead of >>>taking a rook to go up +5. Which program would you rather have? >> >>The one that knows how to get to the position where it can win either way. >> >>Dave > >But if one way (that can be unique to the victory path) >of those all ways is not feasible, then what? >Too, underpromotions weigh in esthetic terms, not only practical. If? Well, then you miss the win. Tough one. But how realistic is this "if"? Not very. However, if accounting for underpromotions would slow down Junior by a few percent in every game it plays, that's not an "if", that's a definite relative penalty, in every single game. It's a chess engine. Aesthetics are for user interfaces, not engines. ;-) Dave
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.