Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:14:08 06/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 1999 at 19:05:29, KarinsDad wrote: >On June 16, 1999 at 18:44:25, Dann Corbit wrote: > >[snip] >>Let's just call it "Markov Process Variations." >>That way it will sound a lot more scientific and important. >>It is often the case that when people say "luck" what they really mean is that >>there is an element of probability involved. Personally, I don't believe in >>luck, but I do believe in probability. > >Good plan. > >I believe in luck in random circumstances such as a large meteor striking the >atmosphere and it is big enough so that a marble sized fragment hits the ground >500 feet away from me. Boy, was I lucky that it did not strike closer. It is an >extremely improbable event in the first place, but there is no normal way to >determine when and where it could happen, hence if you have a close call, you >are lucky that the improbable event did not occur (or if it does occur, you are >unlucky). > >But in computer chess (for the most part), things are deterministic at a >micro-level. Otherwise, you could not play the same variation against a computer >program and identically repeat a game (I am sure that some programmers attempt >to make their programs non-deterministic in some ways). Things are not >deterministic at a macro-level (i.e. you do not control who you will play and in >which round, etc.), but although the macro level affects the outcome of the >tournament, it does not prevent a strong program from defeating all comers. So, >I do not believe in luck as such in a computer chess tournament. > >KarinsDad :) I believe in a bit of luck, such as when you make a move thinking you win a pawn, and you end up winning the queen, or you are behind and find a move that seems to be a draw, but which wins the house (happened to crafty in the first KKUP match against chessmaster, where crafty thought a wild knight sac led to a draw, but it actually led to a crushing attack that it saw a few moves later.) And then there is the kind of luck where you make a move thinking you win a pawn, but where you really lose the house. yes more depth would help. But there will _always_ be cases where you make the right move for the wrong reasons and the wrong move for the right reasons... luck... always there... at least it always has been in my programs, and even in my own personal play.. :)
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.