Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 06:09:23 08/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2004 at 09:08:14, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On August 03, 2004 at 05:53:31, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On August 03, 2004 at 04:21:45, martin fierz wrote: >> >>>ah, i just read your answer above - sorry for asking a second time... hmm, i'll >>>have to try this! >>> >>>any idea how much better your "correct" MVV/LVA is compared to the value >>>comparison? >> >>It depends on the rest of the program. But it could be quite significant. >> >>It's one of these things were everybody gets it wrong the first time >>because the most logical thing to do is not correct because of the >>weird stuff an alphabeta searcher looks at :) >> >>-- >>GCP > >How is this not standard MVV/LVA? > >To me this seems exactly equivalent to: > > >value = (victim_value << 10) - attacker_value; > >or some such, which would also sort things into MVV/LVA order . . . > >anthony Unless people are doing something stupid like value = victim_value - attacker value . . . which would be an easy mistake to make. anthony
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.