M Winther wrote on Sat, Sep 26, 2009 01:13 PM UTC:
Sam, for a computer to make reasonable opening moves in orthochess it is sufficient to allow it to randomly choose between 1.c4, 1.d4, 1.e4 and 1.Nf3. It's equally simple in Capablanca variants. It is completely meaningless to allow an engine to run overnight to determine which first move is the best. Many moves are equally good until grandmasters after years of play and analysis have arrived at a conclusion.
The ramification of variations is so vast and one can't draw any conclusions about first opening moves this way. There are deep strategies involved, concerning endgame properties, for instance. In the Sicilian defence, black's minority attack and the pressure on the backward white c-pawn will create a slight advantage for black if the endgame is reached. A computer cannot draw such conclusions and determine in favour of 1...c5 after a night's analysis. The ramification in Capablanca variants is even greater. This effort of computer analysis is meaningless. If you want to establish the foundational openings, then move any centre pawn and a knight in any reasonable combination for both parties. Then you will have perhaps 30-40 good openings to choose from.
However, randomized pawns is not 'untested blue sky ideas' while I have tested it in Chess256, and Zade has implemented it for [a Capablanca chess variant*]. Obviously, the randomized pawn configuration, in itself, lessens the deterministic aspect of computer play. Moreover, as the pawn development is already partly established, a computer can immediately choose between good piece moves and good pawn moves. Otherwise, with all pawns on the second rank, it has almost only good pawn moves at his disposal. I never suggested Embassy Chess or Teutonic Chess, but this solution would probably work for those as well.
/Mats
*edited for site policy
Sam, for a computer to make reasonable opening moves in orthochess it is sufficient to allow it to randomly choose between 1.c4, 1.d4, 1.e4 and 1.Nf3. It's equally simple in Capablanca variants. It is completely meaningless to allow an engine to run overnight to determine which first move is the best. Many moves are equally good until grandmasters after years of play and analysis have arrived at a conclusion.
The ramification of variations is so vast and one can't draw any conclusions about first opening moves this way. There are deep strategies involved, concerning endgame properties, for instance. In the Sicilian defence, black's minority attack and the pressure on the backward white c-pawn will create a slight advantage for black if the endgame is reached. A computer cannot draw such conclusions and determine in favour of 1...c5 after a night's analysis. The ramification in Capablanca variants is even greater. This effort of computer analysis is meaningless. If you want to establish the foundational openings, then move any centre pawn and a knight in any reasonable combination for both parties. Then you will have perhaps 30-40 good openings to choose from.
However, randomized pawns is not 'untested blue sky ideas' while I have tested it in Chess256, and Zade has implemented it for [a Capablanca chess variant*]. Obviously, the randomized pawn configuration, in itself, lessens the deterministic aspect of computer play. Moreover, as the pawn development is already partly established, a computer can immediately choose between good piece moves and good pawn moves. Otherwise, with all pawns on the second rank, it has almost only good pawn moves at his disposal. I never suggested Embassy Chess or Teutonic Chess, but this solution would probably work for those as well. /Mats *edited for site policy