On Mar 10, 2:08 pm, help bot wrote:
On Mar 10, 9:00 am, " wrote:



But in a practical sense what does this really mean? A 10 centipawn
edge is dubious at best for a human player. 25 centipawns is better
but still it's something that a computer understands and a human would
have a much harder time converting into something tangible. And, go a
few plies deeper and we swing another 10 cp in either direction. We
are fooling ourselves if we think this is any sort of practical guide
in real-life play.

In fact, as the position stood, and as it would be played by humans,
even top grandmasters, Black did have an edge simply in the fact that
there were positional considerations that humans could understand and
deal with. Those considerations would have been overturned by
extremely deep and complex concrete analysis of which only a computer
is capable. The computer would have perhaps won with White (certainly
not have lost), but in the real game, Black pushed his "real life"
advantage and made a win out of it.

To take this exposition to an unexpected conclusion, this all explains
why I like Sanny and I like GitClub. They make very human errors, the
kind of errors and blunders that I make. I can relate to them. I
cannot relate to Rybka on any level.

Well, some of the computer vs. computer games
I replayed had Rybka winning endgames which
most humans would give up as impossible to make
headway in. In these games, I could not pinpoint
the specific errors which led to the opponents'
downfall, and no information was provided as to
how those programs evaluated the positions as
they crumbled.

But there are plenty of cases where strong
programs will improve on "theory", and all that is
needed is to see the improvement and its
immediate follow-up in order for us to understand
perfectly, so to speak. Often as not, it is just a
clever tactic, or a material sacrifice which we
reject out-of-hand but which the program takes
the time to evaluate objectively.

I read quite a few "raving reviews" regarding
the GM Bronstein book you mentioned, and
with great expectations I began to peruse a
copy. I was greatly disappointed in that the
opening moves were just glossed over, when
in fact the positions were very complex and
anything but obvious. I vaguely recall that the
author might jump clear to move fifteen before
offering any insight as to what was happening,
[...]

You were (greatly :-) disappointed because you didn't
peruse the introduction to the book. I have the 2nd
russian edition of the book. It iincludes two intros,
both to the first and to the second edition. Bronstein
wrote in both introductions that his monography
is devoted to the middle game.

Regards,

Wlod