Author: blass uri
Date: 07:58:28 10/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 1999 at 01:15:17, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>I'm not sure what all the crap about not being creative is. The Deep Thought
>people said for years that massive extensions were the way to go. That was
>fairly creative, seeing as almost all of the micro people disagreed vehemently
>("doesn't work", "it's garbage", "they need it because they have no eval", etc.)
I am surprised to read that almost all of the micro people disagreed.
It is clear to everyone who is interested in chess that there are many positions
in chess when extensions are important and that you cannot solve practically
everything by evaluation.
Everyone who analyze studies and hard combinations like the nolot test knows
that you must do massive extensions to solve them.
I read in the book of David levy (How computers play chess) that Botvinik's
publications described how his program Pioneer was able to solve an hard
position by extensions with a tree of only 200 positions(page 67) so the idea to
do massive extensions is clearly not an original idea of the deep thought
people.
Uri
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.