Author: Paul Jacobean Sacral
Date: 08:03:04 12/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 01, 2005 at 10:53:00, chandler yergin wrote: >That's why I so distrustful about Computer analysis. >Until you actually take the Line out to Mate you're never sure. >High PV Evals are just that..'evals'. The position could be a draw, >or the next Ply search could be a Fail High or Low, or the Mate far >below the horizon. Yes, although usually and considering the short time required for good quality(seconds), computer analysis is superior in let's say 95% of the cases, to a strong commentator if he is not supported by a computer. (Super gms are usually not commentators.) As for mate combinations, it also depends on the engine how reliable the mate depth reported, is. I have good experiences with Tiger. It will most often find the shortest mate. In the range up to #6 or #7, I do not remember that it ever announced a longer mate than the shortest possible one (nor a wrong shorter one). Yours truly Paul J. Sacral
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.