Single Comment

Aberg variation of Capablanca's Chess. Different setup and castling rules. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

H.G.Muller wrote on Mon, Apr 28, 2008 06:59 PM UTC:

Hans Aberg:
| Perhaps the statistical method is only successful because it is 
| possible by a brute-force search to seek out positions not covered 
| by the classical theory.

I am not sure what 'brute force' you are referring to. Do you consider
Monte-Carlo sampling of a quantity you want to measure a 'brute force'
approach? I would associate that more with exhaustive search. Playing a
few thousand games can hardly be called 'exhaustive', considering the
size of the game tree for Chess.

What do you mean by 'classical theory'? Are you referring to the piece
value system 1,3,3,5,9, or some more elaborate point system including
positional advantages, or very complex methods of proving a certain
position can be won against any play?

What does it matter anyway how the piece-value system for normal Chess was
historically constructed anyway? Don't you agree that the best way to play
the game through a piece-value heuristic is to make sure that positions
with better piece values (in your favor, i.e. yours minus those of the
opponent) will have a better probability to be won? (It will be understood
that the heuristic will only be applied to 'quiet positions': the players
are supposed to be smart enough to search low-depth tactical trees that
makes them recognize that the are not a Pawn ahead but a Queen behind when
the opponent has a passer that they cannot stop, or has the move and can
capture their hanging Queen.)