Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:40:25 02/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2005 at 20:38:22, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >On February 19, 2005 at 19:32:33, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On February 19, 2005 at 18:46:53, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >> >>>>Note that I never claimed that a good book cannot help an engine to win a >>>>tournament. >>>>If people understood it from me then I did a bad explaining job. >>>>I will try to do better explaining job in this post. >>>> >>> >>>??????????? !!!!!!!!!!!!! Go to (*)(**) >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I said that I consider book as unimportant and I said that an engine that is >>> >>>(*) unimportant = not meaning much, not having value or significance >>> >> >>I agree with the definition but the question what is unimportant is also a >>question of opinion >> >>reasons for me to consider book as unimportasnt are the following: >>1)not considering the target of winning tournament as an important target >>2)thinking that it is possible to improve engine instead of book and get better >>results >>If shredder9 with book is weaker than some future Shredder19 without book then >>it is going to show point 2. >> > >(1) Impossible that it happens simply. Shredder is always acompanied by its >tuned and tested book in official Tournaments. In the particular case of >Shredder, both the engine and the book have been improved and they also >constituted a pretty well tested piece of software. The Tournaments have showed >that the book of Mr. Sandro Necchi has also helped. > >Saying that the Shredder´s book has been unimportant is not true ( I would not >like to use "a big lie" since it is rude term). I agree that shredder will always play in tournament by book. The point is that even if it has 50% chances to win without book then it is still better to have 90% chances to win with book. I agree that we will not be able to test shredder19 without book against shredder9 with book so we will unable to test if shredder19 without book is stronger. > > >>>(1) Contradiction: "I did not claim that a book cannot help an engine...." .... >>>"I consider the book as unimportant..." >>> >>>(**) read the meaning of unimportant(*). >>> >>> >>> >>>>strong enough has good chances to win even with 1.h3 but >>> >>>(2) I have also suggested that 1. f3!! and 2. g4!! would be a lot better. :)) >>>The tops engine are already prepared for all those idiot moves including 1. h3? >>>and 1. f3?? >> >>This is only an example. >> >>The idea is clear. >>There are many ways to get the opponent out of book without lost position and it >>is not hard to find some line to take the opponent out of book with equality or >>almost equality with white. >> > >(2) An equal position may not be good for a chess program but great for other >chess program. An equal position can already mean a lost game for an engine. >That is one of the advantages of a tuned book: The engine that can get positions >where it will behave OK and the opponent will "feel" bad, it means the opponents >will make some mistake. The positions "equal" in chess is a term very relative: >If Engine A gets a position where it has a clear plan but the Engine B doesnt >know what to do, you know what the result will be. Of course but in order to know that the opponent will "feel" bad you need to know the opponent. If some strong engine is hidden by it's author and made a very big improvement then you cannot know it's weaknesses. > >If you also give such an advantage with initial idiot moves such as 1. h3?!, of >course, Shredder will smash anything. > >>>(5) Shredder, Junior and Fritz han showed this is not true over the latest years >>>in Official Tournaments. All of them use strong book tuned by hand. I have not >>>seen the first case from a no-book engine winning an official Tournament. Where >>>are the facts? >>> >>>AO >> >>The facts are that as long as the difference between engines is not very big a >>book may be important factor in winning tournaments. >> > >Incorrect: Unless you call Blasstradamus, you cannot base your suppositions on >things that have never happened. > >facts <> things that have never happened >facts = things that have really happened I do not see what incorrect in what I said. I guess that you also agree that a book can be a decisive factor in winning tournament when the difference between engines is not very big. I guess that even in case that there is going to be a big difference in playing strength between engines the best engine will use book because it is better to be sure in 99% in victory then to be sure in 60% in victory so not using book by the winner is something that I do not expect to happen. Uri
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.