Le vendredi 22 décembre 2006 16:03, Don Dailey a écrit : > So it becomes far more important to play the opponent, not the board. > All your hopes and dreams depend on your opponent, not the brilliancy > of your moves (all of which lose.)
This is a problem of knowledge and estimation. In the beginning of 9 handi game , the ration of stones is 1 white / 9 black, so position looks bad for W. But knowledge says : play normal moves, wait and see. Just play the board is a winning strategy if handicap is correct. Play opponent = play trick moves, overplay, this is usually losing strategy. > > So it makes a great deal of sense to understand your opponent and > to play in such a way that your opponent is more likely to go wrong. > I'm not aware of any computers that think in these terms. However, > humans do! It seems that strong chess programs play like this, or are tuned like this for a specific opponent. > > I remember seeing a game annotated where a good player beat a program > with some huge number of handicap stones. The annotations made > it very clear that the human player was far more concerned with > his opponent than the board. This is true for exceptional games, where the aim is to demonstrate how stupid the go programs are :( http://gailly.net/go.html in section "Computer Go" contains many links to human/computer games with huge handi (up to 29 Martin Mueller/ManyFaces) But no human rated near 6-9 k (like GNU Go, Aya, ManyFaces, HandTalk ...) could lose a game against a 5dan with 29 handi ! > > I'm fairly confident that in low handicap games where there is not > a great deal of strength difference between players, this can be > ignored without too many side effects. The same issues I > describe exist, but we may be able to safely ignore them. I can't > say that for sure since I am not a strong player. > > - Don > Alain _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
