Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:22:35 03/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2001 at 12:18:26, Ralf Elvsén wrote:
>On March 29, 2001 at 11:27:23, Hans Christian Lykke wrote:
>
>
>>32... g5 {-0.78/17 7200} 33. f5 {-1.19/16 120:00m} *
>>
>>[D] rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1
>>
>>Shredder played the move expected by Deep Fritz: 33.f5
>>Shredders evaluation dropped from -0.48/16 to -1.19/16 ?!
>>
>>Shredder now expecting 33...Rxf5 34. Re3
>>
>>Next move by Deep Fritz on Friday
>>
>>Venlig hilsen
>>Hans Christian Lykke
>
>In this situation I wonder: are you keeping a strict 2h/move? Or do you
>let Shredder look at all moves at the depth?
>
>If you terminate the search after exactly 2h and don't let shredder finish
>an iteration I think this game isn't particularly interesting. This is
>not even close to how a program would allocate time in a real game.
This is not close to how a program allocate time in a real game but it does not
do the game not interesting.
In a real game programs never have 2 hours per move so the level in this game
should be higher than the level in a real game.
Uri
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.