Author: Don Dailey
Date: 19:21:49 06/29/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 29, 1998 at 19:53:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 29, 1998 at 18:33:36, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >> >>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 > >4. first time we could have won. last three we were just busted. They see >too much. I really don't think you are correct to draw these conclusions from only 4 games. You make it seem like you had no chance whatsoever, and I have no doubt whatsover that this is how you felt as you watched your own brainchild lose to them. You might very well be right but your last statement isn't exactly convincing evidence, "first time we could have won, last threee we were just busted. They see too much." Re-think this please. We are talking about Deep Thought, not Deep Blue. I would prefer to see 30 or 40 games with a lopsided score before I would agree with you. Cray Blitz was no slouch. - Don
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.