Author: Joseph Merolle
Date: 22:38:12 02/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 08, 2001 at 03:51:15, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 08, 2001 at 00:50:29, William Penn wrote: > >>On February 06, 2001 at 18:46:21, James wrote: >> >>>On February 06, 2001 at 15:27:23, Jorge wrote: >>> >>>>I have settings for CM6666, and it is very good! It is winning a tourny that i >>>>made (+12 -3 =8) with different personalities, including CMKarpov, CMNimzo732, >>>>CMQueen++, Bendorz, Fischer, and few others. I have CM8000 too, but I get the >>>>feeling that CM6000 settings are stronger than CM8000 with same settings. But I >>>>have no proof of course. >>>> >>>>Thanks, I'll "test drive" 6777 later tonight. I have the cm7000 can someone here tell me how to get the top setting on cm7000 pease right down the steps involved >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>Jorge >>>don't know what cm6777 settings are, but.. with 4 years experience, there are no >>>overall settings for cm better than cm default max sel. ... however.. thewre are >>>settings that are better for given games. As previously posted, the overall >>>strength of the personally known chessmasters in asending order are: cm7k, cm8k, >>>ckm6k, and cm55. And btw, who said that move is a "weak" move? >> >> >>I used CM6777 for a long time, and it is definitely good. I've had less >>experience with the CM8000 analog so am reserving judgement. However I feel that >>increasing the selectivity to maximum (or beyond) is definitely a plus. >> >>The main problem I had with the CM6777 settings was that it overvalues the Queen >>(in my opinion) in some situations. For example it heads for endgames of Q vs. R >>+ piece + P, where the Queen can only draw. So I'm inclined to value the Queen >>somewhat less, relative to that particular combination of pieces. Of course you >>must also consider whether it is properly valued vs. a pair of Rooks, and vs. 3 >>pieces. A compromise is required. >> >>I am currently using piece values which I believe are more conservative than >>CM6777, but are probably an improvement over the defaults: Q=9.3, R=5, B=3.2, >>N=3.1, P=1.0. As for the other settings, I use half of CM6777's deviations from >>defaults: Attacker/Defender +1, Contempt for Draw +0.1, Material/Position -1, >>Control of Center 101, Mobility 102, King Safety and Pawns Weakness 117. >>Everything else has the default settings, except I set selectivity to 32 with a >>hex editor. Call it the William Penn personality, I guess, because it's fairly >>original. >>WP > >I doubt if selectivity=32 is an advantage. >I think that selectivity is about null move pruning. > >I am interested to know if selectivity=32 can see zunzwangs. > >I am interested to know if selectivity=32 can see faster some mates from my last >game(I suspect that it cannot because the fastest mates is based on the idea of >zungzang. > >For the relevant position from my last game >see http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?153727 > >It is interesting to know what is the best selectivity for solving the position. >I did not try to compare selectivity=10 with other values for selectivity. > >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.