LetitRock
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 62 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Re:Expert with comp vs Expert against comp - 2006/08/15 08:24
isnt the strongest, but it marvelously meets the critewria I layed down.
Most computers are far bewtter at tactics then humans, wholeheartedly even GMs.
In so far these GMs don`t need the strongest progfram as an assistant.
They`ll use programs to support opening, endgame, and tactical analysis, all that "deep" positional knowledge chess programs have is as froth to the understandin top GMs bring to a positoin.
I suspect transparency is more of an issue, you want the program to show you why a tactics is bad quickly, rather than ponder away and claim it loses X pawns.
Of course there are positions where deep tactical anaylsis rightly counts - Sicillain Dragon being a frequent source of such positions, but I think computer discreetly assisted humans would be wise to avoid these unless they are confident their attack will land first.
---------
We may not be able to get certainty, but we can get probability, and half a loaf is better than no bread. - Clive Staples Lewis, 1898 - 1963
Popular posts by LetitRock
GNU Chess 5.05 ready for testing
playing online
Fritz 7 - memory leak?
|
post new topic
