Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: The Limits of Positional Knowledge

Author: Bella Freud

Date: 15:42:41 11/11/99

Go up one level in this thread

On November 11, 1999 at 04:45:50, Bruce Moreland wrote:

>On November 11, 1999 at 03:37:10, Michael Neish wrote:
>>This has led me to another question.  Supposing you stubbornly insist on using
>>alpha-beta, and not add any of the sophisticated embellishments that everyone
>>talks about (killer move, null move, etc).  How far can you expect to go just on
>>programming positional sense alone?  I ask this because it seems to me (as
>>someone mentioned only last week on rgcc) that positional sense in a program is
>>to a large extent only window dressing, and that the strength in a program lies
>>mainly in its ability to search deep.  From my meagre experience as a Chess
>>programmer it seems to me that positional sense provides nothing more than
>>general pointers to the program to play sensibly.
>If you don't refine the search, you'll get some nice evaluations of lost
>Positional terms can help you avoid voluntarily entering bad positions, but you
>can lose tactically in positions that aren't bad,

"Bruce Moreland" said:

>and you can be forced into
>positions you know are bad due to tactical mistakes.

How very, very, very true.




This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.