Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:57:31 01/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 02, 2000 at 07:34:43, blass uri wrote: >On January 02, 2000 at 06:29:43, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > > ><snipped> >>>The definition of knowledge is not clear to me. >>>I often find that fast searchers have better positional understanding. >> >>I am reading here the biggest crap out of history. > >I agree that you can get a better positional understanding by doing a slower >searcher but it does not imply that practically slower searchers have better >positional understanding. > >I saw cases when Hiarcs and fritz "believed" that they were better and fritz was >right in the evaluation of the position not because it saw 1 or 2 plies more. > >Here are some possible reasons why fast searchers have often better positional >understanding. > >1)The programmers of the slow searchers do not use the right parameters in their >program. > >2)The programmers of the slow searchers do not know what to evaluate and they >evaluate many unimportant things instead of small number of important things. > >3)The slow searchers are slow because the programmers of them did not know how >to do the same thing faster. > >Uri I need to add to that that 99.99% of the audience likes to get cheated to. Your positions are basically tactical determined, or measure the agressiveness of a program. That's not how games get won. You don't win a game because you're more agressive tuned. Does nimzo play that much better because it's extremely aggressive tuned? You are just someone who likes to get fooled by a programs agressiveness. As soon as you put up a position where you don't make a fault yourself, then suddenly the program makes major mistakes as it doesn't see an aggressive move, or if you give it a position where it should not make an aggressive move, then it still will make an aggressive move which is unsound. Vincent
This page took 0.01 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.