Author: John Scalo
Date: 15:39:08 12/30/97
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 1997 at 14:53:03, Don Dailey wrote: >Hi again, > >After re-reading your post I think I see a problem with the move >ordering you use for captures: > > <small takes big>/<equal exchange>/<big takes small> > >Try this: > > Always sort the biggest victim first and then in the order of > smaller attacker. > >This may seem counter-intuitive but it's proven to be quite good. > >So QxR should get looked at even before PxB even though PxB is an >upcapture. Even though upcaptures seem to be sure winners keep >in mind that in a quies search lots of really silly positions >arise. More often than not the rook in my example is completely >undefended (often it just moved to some square or was involved >in a capture itself and is undefended.) So you would rather >capture a rook than a bishop wouldn't you? In the cases where >the rook is defended the capture search will terminate very >quickly anyway since the capture of the queen will be the very >first move tried on the next level. > >-- Don I've always seen MVV/LVA and assumed it was pretty much the same as what I was doing, but now that you've explained it I realize it's definitely *not* what I'm doing :-) To be clear, an example ordering with MVV/LVA might be: PxR RxR QxR QxB PxP correct?? Thanks, -j
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.