Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 06:52:44 08/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2004 at 09:09:23, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >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 Maybe it's a good idea to read a thread a bit more before replying. -- 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.