Author: Mark Young
Date: 18:37:59 07/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 1999 at 21:26:58, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >On July 23, 1999 at 21:08:43, Mark Young wrote: > >>On July 23, 1999 at 20:21:23, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >> >>> >>>On July 23, 1999 at 19:21:54, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>rnbk3r/pp4bp/1qp2pP1/3p3B/4p2N/2P5/PPP3PP/R1BQK2R w KQ - 0 1 >>>> >>>>Mel, the move a4 in this position seems to me to be a good move. White needs >>>>counter play on the queenside to drive blacks queen off her post at b6, which >>>>controls the a7-g1 diagonal and also attacks whites b2 pawn tying down whites >>>>bishop to the defense of this pawn and keeping it from developing, and also >>>>keeps white from playing o-o. I would grade the move a4 as a good and logical >>>>move in this position, unless you can show a refutation to this move. I did not >>>>see one. >>> >>>Mark, my previous response to this post was in thinking you were referring to >>>the other position where I played a4. I now realize you are referring to the >>>other game where Hiarcs considered a4 but after making the move, the score went >>>way down for Hiarcs to a minus. That's why I let it replay the move twice as >>>stated and each time it played Rf1 with a better score. Hiarcs saw trouble with >>>a4 and that's why it would not play the move again. I don't have the position in >>>front of me, but I am certain that a4 was not a good move and both Fritz and >>>Rebel didn't like it and Hiarcs would not repeat it, and so I feel confident in >>>saying Hiarcs positional learning fuction was at work here. >>> >>>Regards, >>>Mel >> >>If a4 is "not a good move" then how do you refute it? I could care less what a >>programs eval functions says, because as you know one program can say white has >>the advantage and on could say black has the advantage. Show or tell me why this >>is a bad move, telling me an eval fuction or saying Fritz would not play this >>move as its first choice does not show how or why or prove that a4 is a blunder >>and a bad move. > >Mark, Hiarcs itself considered a4 a bad move! That's why it would not repeat it >when I let it replay the move twice! For me to go back to that game and analyze >the position would be very time consuming. If you set up the position before a4 >and let Hiarcs select a move, see what it plays and notice the score by HIarcs >while waiting for a reply. Next, have Hiarcs replay the move and see WHAT move >Hiarcs selects. That should solve the issue. If a4 was not a bad move, why would >it keep playing Rf1 instead??? > >Regards, >Mel I'm sorry Mel, but you are the one claiming that a4 is a blunder played by Hiarcs 7.32. My Hiarcs still likes the move. If you can't or won't back up you claim...... "Hiarcs itself considered a4 a bad move!" Now you are doing it again, you claim a4 is bad move and a blunder because now your Hiarcs will not pick it as its first move. This is not proof either that the move a4 is a blunder. Any move that is not a programs first choice does not mean that move is a blunder or weak.
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.