Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: You mean to say that when humans do a opening preparation it's a trap?!

Author: James T. Walker

Date: 06:01:31 11/06/99

Go up one level in this thread


On November 06, 1999 at 04:59:27, Thorsten Czub wrote:

>On November 05, 1999 at 20:06:31, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>
>> I have though on it many times. Deep lines in
>>opening are double edged swords. The deepest, the worst IF the opponent know
>>about your "deep" line.
>
>exactly.
>
>> Programs should do as Lasker did, remember?,
>
>yes - i do remember. I like lasker too.
>our engines are often that strong that you don't have to fear
>opening positions without book, they will find a way...
>
>> he did not
>>pay so much attention to opening, it seems he barely knew about them or at least
>>a lot less than his colleagues. There is a book written by him about that
>>philosophy. He said: I must try to do common sense moves in this stage and
>>should be enough not to be overwheelmed there, at most you can get a somewhat
>>inferior position, but then middle game comes and you have a lot things to do
>>to reverse things. Computers have enough power to do the same. Better to begin
>>analysis at move 4 or 5 in a simple, safe line, winning or not by yourself than
>>to go trought a long, erudite line and be smashed as an idiot.
>
>yes - thats the way I always tried to handle it.
>let the engine play, and not the opening book.
>yes.
>
>>I apply to myself
>>that philosophy as much I am not prepared to expend half my life learning lines
>>that probably are obsolete the next day they were pubished. For computer it is
>>worst because they not even can think than that can happens. Like parrots, they
>>follow the track and get killed even by an inferior player -human of iron-
>>provided he did he home task.
>>Fernando
>
>yes. sad. and therefore : better use a small unknown book, that throws
>opponent out of book and BOTH engines have to compute... if you know
>your engine is strong, you don't have to fear it.

Hello Thorsten,
One problem with small books is it will lack variety.  Given the same first 5
moves the program will sit there and compute the same answer after 3 minutes.
So with this knowledge it's even easier to prepare for it in the same way as if
it had a large deep book.  There is only one possibility from each position
instead of multiple possibilities from a wide book.  Of course the only way to
keep your small book "unknown" is to make one every time you play a game.
Jim Walker



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.