Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:05:23 10/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 2003 at 09:56:59, Tord Romstad wrote: >On October 16, 2003 at 08:35:54, Uri Blass wrote: > >>Nalimov tablebases are not very important for endgames and they are not going to >>change results in most of the endgames. > >This depends to a great extent on the engine, I think. The experiments I have >seen which conclude that tablebases have no measurable effect on playing >strength >have always been conducted with strong engines like Yace and Crafty, which >probably play excellent endgames even without tablebases. I expect that a >program >with little or badly tuned endgame knowledge will profit much more from >tablebases. > >Tord Most of the mistakes in endgames are in positions when tablebaes cannot help. Maybe they can help if the program does not know to win KQ vs K but better evaluation can solve this problem and more problems so I do not think that tablebases is the right thing to add. Uri Uri
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.