Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:52:51 09/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 26, 2001 at 22:09:14, Thomas Mayer wrote: >Hi Bob, > >>> Or if the opponent move is forced, I ponder the response. >>> Or if the opponent move is obvious or takes most of the search time etc., I >>> ponder the response. >> >> >> Here is the problem.. I had to explain this to Komputer Korner a few years >> ago >> as well... >> >> If you correctly predict your opponent's move at least 50% of the time, or >> more, then the way we currently ponder can _not_ be improved on. Because in >> at least 50% of the cases, we will be correct, and we focus all our search >> time on the _right_ move. If our target time is 3 minutes, and our opponent > makes a move after 3 minutes or longer, we can move instantly and use no time >> on our clock. > >> For any other scheme, you are going to split your search time among at _least_ >> two moves and more likely more than that. That means that after your opponent >> searches for 3 minutes and makes a move, you haven't searched more than 90 >> seconds on any one move. You have to keep going for another 90 seconds if one >> of the two moves you have been fiddling with is correct. And if not, you have >> to spend a full 3 minutes. So best case is you save 90 seconds. If you could >> narrow your pondering to 2 moves, and the opponent _always_ played one of >> those two moves, you will save 90 seconds every move, where I save 180 >> seconds every other move (assuming a 50% prediction rate). We are "even". >> But I know I am going to be wrong one of every two moves (actually less, as >> against GM players in long games I get 75-80% right generally). But if you >> fiddle with more than 2 moves, you will lose big time, because if you try 3, >> you will spend 60 seconds on each, and when your opponent moves you only >> saved 60 seconds if he plays one of your three possibilities. I save 3 >> minutes every other move. You save 180 seconds every other move. It is easy > to see which is better. >> >> If you can't predict correctly 50% of the time, then this changes of course. >> But I have never seen that happen, at least in my case. If it does, my >> opponent is losing badly. > >Well so far I was doing it, because others do it... but now I am doing it, >because you give me the correct arguments why to do so... :) > >Greets, Thomas > >P.S.: Have you some statistics how often you ponder correct against comps ? Is >there any difference between comps and humans ? I guess yes, but I am unsure in >which direction... :) A few pieces of data. Vs comps: 45/73 predicted. 61/84 predicted. 54/84 predicted. 44/54 predicted. Against GMs: 40/59, 46/75, 17/35, 28/43, 54/93 So at least 50% and generally higher. In longer games, this goes up. In blitz (which the above games were) the prediction rate is lower and human (particularly) blunders are more frequent. I'm not really positive that it does better against comps or humans in predicting. I have seen higher rates at longer games... ie when Crafty is watching/observing GM games...
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.