Author: Stefan Fredriksson
Date: 05:13:27 01/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2001 at 10:42:03, Uri Blass wrote: >>OK.. let's be clear here. If your program doesn't understand forks, a 3 ply >>search will fix that hole. If your program doesn't understand blocked >>positions, a 50 ply search will repair that hole. But I don't think a 50 >>ply search is going to happen. Some kinds of missing knowledge can be covered >>by a search (don't realize a passed pawn on the 7th is strong? a few plies >>will show this although sometimes it takes 10-20 plies to see that the pawn >>is going to cause problems. Don't realize two connected passers on the 6th are >>strong? again sometimes 8-10 plies will show this, sometimes it will take >>20+). >> >>The kind of hole being exploited vs Rebel isn't going to be helped by another >>10 plies. > >Ed found that Rebel could save the game that it lost against Van dar wiel by >deeper search. > >It seems that 1 or 2 more plies than the game are enough to save game 3. > >I do not say that it is enough to win the match but it is enough to get better >result. > >Uri Did he check the entire game or just afew moves. Perhas it would find 2-3 better moves but maybe the longer search would cause Rebel to play another move diffrently so the entire game would be diffrent. Its doesnt prove much to just check afew moves and say 'it would have won/draw this game if only I had deeper search' /Stefan
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.