Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:36:42 08/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 18, 2003 at 10:41:20, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On August 16, 2003 at 23:14:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>If you don't try a hash table move first, then you will probably try captures >>and captures have re-captures that work instantly. Hence more cutoffs. Just >>try it... > >I did, and I already posted my results. So did Dieter, and so did the >original poster after running a few more positions. None of those results >suggested better 'move ordering' (FH%) with worse move ordering. As I said, YMMV. In my case, it _did_ show up as I explained. I cleverly wrecked the hash table move and didn't really notice it at first. When I fixed it, the 1fh% went _down_. I investigated for a bit, and found that for the tests I used, the captures were the key. > >>The hash move is often _not_ a capture. But if you try a capture first, >>then the corresponding re-capture will be an instant cutoff that is easier >>to find than a reply to a non-capture. > >The reply to the noncapture will be an instant cutoff as well in most >cases, since you have a hash move in that case Most likely you won't. IE I don't get but maybe 10-20% hash hits in middlegame positions. That leaves 80% misses. > >If it's a capture, and the correct reply is a noncapture, you're screwed >without hash. Not necessarily. Killer moves. Killer moves. That's why they were originally used. :) > >-- >GCP
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.