Penny314 wrote: > At the grandmaster level an extra four ply means very little. The ability to > evaluate deep endgame structure, or balance subtle middle game structural > issues if far more important. Things like: is my greater number of pawn islands > going to hurt me more, thirty moves from now, than my domination of the Q5 > knight outpost and the open file help me.
This is an interesting point of view, and it's shared by some strong players. I personally think the difference between a full-width search to 17 ply is going to be significantly stronger than a full-width search to 13 ply, always assuming the usual extensions on top of them. My feeling is that chess involves tactical subtleties that may not be apparent even to grandmasters, and the strategic and structural issues are only important if you survive the middle game. It must be emotionally very tiring to be that careful for that long. Against humans you can expect to get away with missing an occasional 16-ply trap.
> Kasparov played very badly in the match against deep blue. He was > emotionally psyched. I would like to see > the computer play other grandmasters.
So would I.
> Personally ,I think Anand would creme it.
I'd love to see that match.
-- Jim Gillogly Highday, 13 Afterlithe S.R. 2000, 06:09 18.104.22.168.7, 1 Manik 10 Tzec, First Lord of Night