Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 15:33:36 06/29/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 29, 1998 at 13:28:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 29, 1998 at 12:39:13, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>I am merely stating that it can't be said that null-move is bad just because DB >>doesn't do it. >there I'd agree. They are so much faster/stronger than the rest of us, that >whether they use null-move or not is probably inconsequential. I believe that >null-move would make them even stronger, but Hsu has this "perfection" syndrome >that refuses to accept any error at all unless it is unavoidable. With null- >move, you instantly agree to accept errors, in return for more depth that might >catch errors you didn't agree to accept. You have seen where this attitude gets you on a micro, I am sure, and my point is that once you have learned to jettison this attitude, I don't think you'll take it back if you get the horsepower again. >without a doubt correct, although I probably lean a little backward toward Cray >Blitz now, since parallel processing has boosted my speed enough, I'm now trying >to find time to investigate things that I found useful in CB, like singular >extensions, for one example. I'd like to one day try null-move R=2 on CB, but >it would be *very* difficult to do since all that stuff is in assembly language. >But I'd like to know how that affects the thing since I *never* tried it, never >even tried recursive null-move in fact.. I bet there would be a dramatic improvement. My feeling is based upon running Ferret with and without null-move during its evolution. Null-move is always dramatically better overall on extended tactical tests. >they had a lot of pressure from us. We were never slow, and almost beat them >the first time we played them, but a cute SMP bug made us avoid a outright >winning move that they were expecting, and we were going to play, until the >last minute. > >In fact, they never "overwhelmed" us in speed, since they were doing 2-3M nodes >per second in deep thought II, while we were only doing 1/4 of that or so at >the time. As a result, their stick wasn't "that big", only a factor of 4 or >so. But other things were certainly working for them in our games, like SE >for one. How many times did you play them? bruce
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.