Author: Ruud Martin
Date: 14:19:00 11/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
Uri, We play in Leiden with an external clock which is operated by us. In Leiden the operator has to adjust time in the computer during play (while the opponent is thinking..) With 12 minutes starting time i decided to play with 10 seconds per move which i later reduced to 5 seconds. The Resurrection with Fruit will always finish a ply to all moves. If the opponent is thinking for a long time it could be that Resurrection is thinking at for example depth 11. If the opponent is playing the ponder move, it could take a long time for Fruit to respond, because it will finish all moves within depth 11. At # announcement, i should stop Fruit the moment it recalculates the #, but this is at this time not so. I give Fruit the level info every time, so if i am playing at 10 seconds a move, Fruit will think for 10 seconds even if it has seen a mate. The intelligence in my Resurrection program is not that sophisticated... And furthermore i will use time as well on operating :) (too much time ...) I can avoid these problems by giving 10 minutes for the game and use 2 minutes for operating, but i did'n't. I always play with a fixed (average) number of seconds per move. Ruud On November 16, 2005 at 17:10:54, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 16, 2005 at 17:01:42, Ruud Martin wrote: > >>Steve, >> >>The decision delivered some nice fighting between chess computers, which is in >>my opinion a lott nicer to see. A walk over is great for winning the tournament >>but not for making friends in the tournament :) >> >>I lost one game announcing a mate in #06 for Resurrection, but the flag was >>almost in sight. My opponent asked for a draw, because Resurrection had only >>seconds to go, but i was selfish :) This made the adrenaline pumping.... >> >>At #04 my flag dropped :( >> >>Interesting is wheter i still could claim a draw based upon the fact that my >>opponent had no mate potential any more. Not because he had not enough pieces >>but because i announced mate ?!?! I did not think about this at that time ... >> >>Your opinion... ?? >> >>Ruud > >I do not understand >How fruit can lose on time? > >I think that it is a bad time management and you are responsible for it. > >The default time allocation of Fruit is 100 but it is clearly not good and I >know that at least with normal PC you can reduce this number to 80 and I guess >that you can do it also with dedicated computer. > >I assume that you use fruit's clock to decide that fruit lost on time. >In case that you used some external clock then you should consider the operator >time in the initial time that you give fruit. > >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.