Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Validity of self-play testing

Author: Peter McKenzie

Date: 16:47:14 05/22/00

Go up one level in this thread


On May 22, 2000 at 03:37:27, blass uri wrote:

>On May 22, 2000 at 03:22:37, Peter McKenzie wrote:
>
>>Recently I've noticed that my program tends to overvalue pawns, so I've been
>>playing with reducing the pawn value.  How does one test such a change?  Not
>>easily thats for sure!
>>
>>One thing I did was play 150 games vs the old version (new version scored 56% -
>>yay), but I'm a little suspicious about how useful this information is.  For
>>starters the time control was fast (2min + 2sec inc, on P133), although does
>>this really matter for this type of change?
>>
>>I guess I'll probably just go with the new version and keep an eye on its play
>>on ICC...
>>
>>cheers,
>>Peter
>
>I know that Amir Ban found the same thing with Junior5 and this is the reason
>that Junior6a cannot find the famous sacrifice of Junior against nimzo from
>WCCC.

Well, perhaps its better not to find that sacrifice than to find it for the
wrong reasons ?!
I mean, the point of the sac was to get a crushing attack on the king not to win
2 or 3 pawns for a piece.  So the sac should have been found by clever king
safety evaluation (or by search), rather than by a high pawn value.

>
>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.