Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 00:01:52 01/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2000 at 21:47:00, Ed Schröder wrote: >On January 10, 2000 at 17:46:22, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On January 10, 2000 at 17:32:56, Torstein Hall wrote: >> >>> >>>From the game Shebarkov - Rebel. >>> >>>Why is it so difficult for a program to see a bad bishop? >>> >>>[D] 8/p3kp2/2pr1pb1/2b1p3/P3P1Pp/1PNB1P1P/2K5/3R4 w - - 0 26 >> >>This is a special kind of bad bishop, the bishop is permanently dead. It would >>be easy to write something that could understand that the bishop is dead, but it >>would be hard to execute the code hundreds of thousands of times per second. >> > >>Put black's f7 pawn on g7 and black is suddenly doing lots better. > >And can save a few bucks as in my case. I think it is doable to write >code for this kind of situations only that in the 18 years I am working >now on Rebel I haven't seen such a case of a trapped bishop happening. >These guys surely know how to debug a chess engine. That case is extremely bad and you don't see one like that very often, I think. I see bad pieces often against GM's in blitz games. Not meaning to argue, just pointing out that improvement might have practical results. bruce
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.