Author: James Robertson
Date: 21:25:23 03/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2000 at 18:32:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 30, 2000 at 15:04:09, Inmann Werner wrote: > >>On March 30, 2000 at 11:07:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >> >>>Here is mine: >>> >>>1. hash table move. >>>2. captures that don't appear to lose material using a SEE procdedure, >>>ordered from biggest gain to equal exchanges. >>>3. 2 killer moves. >>>4. up to 4 history ordered moves (history heuristic) >>>5. rest of the moves. >> >>question to 5) >>here is the rest of the non capturing moves and the "loosing capture" moves. >>Which of them should be searched first? >> >>IMHO the non capturing moves. >> >>Werner > > >In my case, losing captures come first, but only because that is the way they >appear in the list. IE I generate captures, sift the good ones to the top, and >leave the lemons at the bottom. Later I generate the rest of the moves and add >to the list, which places them after the lemons... Have you tested to see if the move ordering could be improved? In my case I search: Hash move Winning captures Equal captures 2 Killer Moves Noncaptures ordered by the history table All captures (even the ones we already searched) ordered by the history table James
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.