Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:23:50 09/21/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 21, 1998 at 15:13:41, John Coffey wrote: >On September 21, 1998 at 14:58:33, John Coffey wrote: > >>If on the otherhand I search the first move that wins a piece, and all but one >>of my opponents responses regains material, then I could do a null move after >>all but one of my opponent's responses, thus saving close to 80 or 90%. Maybe >>this is the piece of the puzzle that I am missing? >> >>Thanks for the response. Best wishes, >> >>John Coffey > >Errr... maybe not. If all but one of my opponents moves fail to regain a piece >then doing a null move will effectively gives the other side two moves in a row >and then they can regain the piece anyway, thus defeating the null move. So >the null move must work when the opponent has no threats at all. It is hard >for me to see this happening often enough to get such a dramatic *exponential* >reduction in the tree size. > >Again I will take your word for it. I am assuming that we only try the >null move when we have gained material? This is what I have read, but maybe >you try null moves at other times? If so then this would make more sense >to me. > >John Coffey I try them _everywhere_ in the search, before trying any other move. The idea is that if your opponent can't take two moves in a row and crush you, your position is overwhelming and doesn't need any further searching to prove that it is probably winning...
This page took 0.02 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.