Author: Hans Christian Lykke
Date: 14:10:11 03/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2001 at 14:58:57, Chessfun wrote:
>On March 29, 2001 at 12:45:36, Hans Christian Lykke wrote:
>
>>On March 29, 2001 at 12:28:43, Ralf Elvsén wrote:
>>
>>>On March 29, 2001 at 12:22:08, Bertil Eklund wrote:
>>>
>>>>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.
>>
>>Off course this is not a real game. It´s played by me, and I have chosen the
>>time to use ;-)
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Ralf
>>>>
>>>>Looks very close to a fixed time per move I think.
>>>>
>>>>Bertil
>>>
>>>Yes, and how many games are played in that way? And how many engines
>>>have a search able to handle that? But if you
>>>know that Fritz and Shredder can handle this I am happy to have
>>>learned something new.
>>
>>Shredder can handle this, setting the time to exactly 120 min.
>>Deep Fritz cannot, so when 120 min. are over I press the "space" button and DF
>>play the move.
>>
>>BTW I think that 2 hours are better than 1 hour as played in the other Deep
>>Fritz - Shredder game.
>
>
>
>I don't think there is any relationship nor see how 2 hours is better than 1.
>It's the same as saying 4 would be better than 2
I think that 2 is better than 1, 4 is better than 2, 8 is better than 4, 16 is
better than 8.
When I´m checking my correspondence games, I normally let the computer run for
about 12-16 hours.
Venlig hilsen
Hans Christian Lykke (ICCF 2439)
, or pondering is better than
>not which has a heavy bearing in deciding the winner.
>
>The objective is the determining factor as to the time controls chosen and in
>both cases there is little to be gained from one such game.
>
>Sarah.
>
>
>
>
>>Venlig hilsen
>>Hans Christian Lykke
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Think how you play yourself: you play 40/120. You decide to allocate
>>>close to 3min/move. After 2 min 59 s you realize that the move you
>>>think looked very good will give away your queen for nothing. Wouldn't
>>>you spend more time trying to find a better move and be very upset if
>>>someone came and pushed the "Move now"-button?
>>>
>>>Ralf
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.