Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The importance of opening books -- a simple experiment

Author: José Carlos

Date: 06:01:08 02/18/05

Go up one level in this thread


On February 17, 2005 at 14:50:57, John Merlino wrote:

>On February 17, 2005 at 14:23:20, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On February 17, 2005 at 14:15:57, Sune Fischer wrote:
>>
>>>On February 17, 2005 at 14:03:30, Tord Romstad wrote:
>>>
>>>Well 700 Elo is equivalent to about 5-6 pawns material advantage,
>>>I don't think I have ever seen that in an actual game much less
>>>seen it on average.
>>>
>>>I can believe in a good book giving half a pawn or ~50 Elo,
>>>not much more than that is realistic IMO.
>>>
>>>Perhaps the person you refer to is talking about a book
>>>with "perfect chess" reaching 80 plies deep? :)
>>>
>>>-S.
>>
>>No, the person he is talking about simply lives in an alternate universe where
>>our normal rules of physics and math do not apply...
>>
>>I don't see why anyone would even bother participating in that particular
>>discussion, much less running tests.  I claim that water freezes at 12.7C,
>>who is going to run a detailed test to see if that is right or not?  Or is
>>common sense enough?  :)
>
>I can't believe I'm going to do this. But, to defend Vincent and Arturo to some
>degree, I'm PRETTY SURE they were referring to a book that was specifically
>designed to be played against a single opponent. Somebody please correct me if
>I'm wrong.

  Hmm, does this make sense? I mean:
  - if I'm testing killer book vs no book, I will win 100% of the games, just by
picking 2 won games (with white and black) and put the moves in my book.
  - if I'm testing killer book vs random book not known by the book cooker (big
enough to not repeat lines in a match), it's impossible to prepare killer lines
for every possible game. In a match of 100, maybe 5 can be killer lines. That
can't make for 700 elo points.
  - if the book cooker knows the random book in advance, we're near the first
case in that it's a flawed test; it's cheating.

  So I guess Vincent had to be talking about professional book vs no book or
professional book versus random book, without any cooking against a certain
opponent.

  José C.



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.