




![]() |
@Graham Banks wrote:Without books, you need to play with learning enabled, otherwise it's pointless running more than two games (reversed colours).
@ADY125 wrote:YES in fact the first TCEC stage 8.1 was not books, but with tables..no human influence anly in tablebases...I'm using these openings, and change many movements...I propose someone of experience. make a championship of this type..![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
@ADY125 wrote:YES in fact the first TCEC stage 8.1 was not books, but with tables..no human influence anly in tablebases...I'm using these openings, and change many movements...I propose someone of experience. make a championship of this type..![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
@Graham Banks wrote:@ADY125 wrote:YES in fact the first TCEC stage 8.1 was not books, but with tables..no human influence anly in tablebases...I'm using these openings, and change many movements...I propose someone of experience. make a championship of this type..![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
It would be worse than watching paint dry.
@supersharp77 wrote:@ADY125 wrote:YES in fact the first TCEC stage 8.1 was not books, but with tables..no human influence anly in tablebases...I'm using these openings, and change many movements...I propose someone of experience. make a championship of this type..![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
You need books...just limit how deep they are allowed to play "in the book" of course you want the contest to be about the chess engines and not the books
a book only will not "win" the chess game ( ex. Prodeo engine) AR
@sharpov wrote:The way I run my tournaments is theme tournaments, usually 5-9 moves book or where diversity starts to split off with good book moves. Each engine has a black and white with the same starting position. I put for example, 30 different openings incase an engine or two play well in a particular opening or two, this adds diversification and I think equalizes the tournaments as much as can be. As Mr.Banks mentioned, this gives only one black and one white per opening as without learn on any more than that is pointless![]()
Last edited by sharpov on Sun Dec 06, 2015 7:31 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : spelling)
@Masta wrote:What Banks is telling is just a lie. I play without books and although the fact that engines prefer e4 or d4 we can see Nf3 and even e4 or d4 have different continuations. The openings without books are not deterministic as you may think. And what do you want? h4? a4? makes no sense in high quality chess.
BTW...IMO is much better without books...specially at an event like TCEC, because books can be biased towards some position that an engine plays better than other. The whole tournament can be compromised just because someone can choose the openings giving an engine the advantage.
Any case...if you are going to use books you can have many different continuations using a book with just 3 moves each side, would be enough to play c4, Nf3, d4, e4, and many variations from there.
@Graham Banks wrote:Everybody's opinion has value.
However:
- I don't deliberately lie to members.
- I don't appreciate some members going out of their way to be rude to me.
Chess2u » Computer Chess Engines » Free Chess Engines » which program is really the champion ..100% .withou books ..?
Related Topics
|
|