Author: James T. Walker
Date: 09:12:40 11/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 2000 at 02:27:44, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 27, 2000 at 20:39:14, paul bedrey wrote: > >>James did you play with Gambit Tiger yet? I've been thinking of playing them >>against each other but won't if you have done it already or know if one is >>better than the other. I've always thought Hiarcs 7.32 was under-rated. I like >>its style. >> >>Paul > >I expect Hiarcs to suffer at longer time control because of the retaining hash >tables bug. > >I analyze some games of it and I found that there were cases when it had a wrong >evaluation in the first plies because of retaining hash tables bug. > >In fast games it is not a big problem because of the fact that it can get deep >enough to find a better move but at longer time control it may have big problems >because it can waste a lot of time to solve failing low problem and in the worst >case it has not enough time to solve the fail low and play a bad move. > >I believe that it happens more at time control of 2 hours/40 moves when in move >38,39 or 40 it has not enough time to solve the fail low problem. > >Uri Hello Uri, I have not noticed this but I'm sure you are right. The only problem I noticed with Hiarcs in my 22 games vs Chess Tiger was when Hiarcs needed a tablebase I did not have. I downloaded the tablebase and the gave Hiarcs the win in view of announced mate in 17. I have most of the important 5 man tablebases but I'm only adding the rest as they become needed such as the above case. Jim
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.