Author: Will Singleton
Date: 18:35:10 01/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2001 at 09:41:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 25, 2001 at 00:16:04, Andrew Dados wrote: > >>Thanks Bob for very interesting report. >>A couple of loose thoughts... >> >>Recapture extension is intuitively no good for tactical suite for a simple >>reason: all tactical lines give up temporarily material. And lines with >>exchanging down pieces are not 'beautiful' for humans - which was probably one >>of conditions for selecting a 'tactical' position into set like WAC. >> >>It is hard to say if your program plays weaker or stronger in practical games >>because of it. And, btw, one of Craftys strengths is exchanging down to won >>endgame. Maybe some sort of nunn-type match between 2 versions can give more >>data about it? >> >>And if you come down to think about the trend - It would be interesting to run >>your test with recapture extension going below zero....:) >> >>-Andrew- > >Ken Thompson got me started on this in the early 80's. The idea is that >if you are in some kind of trouble (say losing a pawn) then one way to help >"hide" this is the good old BxN PxB sequence. BxN forced the opponent to >recapture the bishop, and that eats two plies of your total search, maybe >hiding the pawn loss. Extending a ply partially offsets this... > >But I have never tested it very thoroughly. I am going to turn it off on >one version and play an extended match, 2cpus to 2cpus.. I'll report on the >result later.. I predict the capture extension version will win easily, especially in medium blitz games (5 0). I have done that test (but not the wac test), and my program definitely plays better with a limited capture extension.
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.