Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 11:22:15 11/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 2000 at 07:47:48, Peter Skinner wrote:
>On November 15, 2000 at 15:23:17, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On November 15, 2000 at 09:52:03, Eduard Nemeth wrote:
>>
>>>This position is real from a game ( but not from Tiger ) !
>>>
>>>8/8/8/6Np/2N5/Pk6/6K1/8 w - a3 0 1
>>>
>>>In this position played a old version from Fritz 5 (Fritz-Nemeth) Ne5?
>>>And the game was draw ! :)
>>>
>>>I give now this position Tiger 13.0 for test an Tiger 13.0 played Ne5 ?
>>>
>>>(With tablebases Tiger how about better)
>>>
>>>Eduard
>>
>>
>>
>>Thanks for pointing this out. I have recorded it in my to do list, and will fix
>>it as soon as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>I can get Tiger to find Nf4 within 2 mins with the regular book, and in 55
>seconds with the London book. Rebel 2.1 analysis engine finds Nf4 instantly. Why
>the difference?
As pointed out by Howard and Mogens, the book has no relevance in this position.
If you let the program think on a position, stop it, take back the move he has
done, then let it think again, you can get a different result. That's because
the program remembers some of the computations he has just done, and so is able
to save time, compute deeper, and find something else.
To avoid this, you can try to switch to another engine, then switch back to the
first engine inside the GUI. Or exit the program and start it again.
The same happens when the program thinks on a position during the course of a
game, and when you load the position (or the whole game) later. But in this case
there is nothing you can do that will guarantee to put the engine in the same
state.
Christophe
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.