Author: blass uri
Date: 00:08:14 11/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 1999 at 22:48:38, Len Eisner wrote: <snipped> >I think this is largely a myth. The current crop of programs are much better >positionally and strategically that CCC people give them credit for. Otherwise, >they could not beat strong masters at any time control. Combinations are only >possible if you have a positional advantage. So these programs must be getting >better positions against masters to make use of their tactical abilities. Keep >in mind that I am not talking about GM's and IMs. I'm saying that today's >programs hold their own in all aspects of the game against everyone below IM >strength Masters and even candidate masters are superior in positional understanding and computers can get good positions against humans because the search push them to see good positions that they understand that they are good. They avoid positional blunders not because of good positional understanding but because the search push them to see that the positional blunders are wrong because the positional blunders lead to a bad position that even they understand that it is bad(they have small positional understanding) or to material loss. 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.