Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:44:46 05/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2001 at 04:22:23, Dan Andersson wrote: >> >>IE I can think of history ideas on when to not do it... but that leaves a _lot_ >>of open ground where they will be tried... trying to restrict it more strongly >>by trying to predict which moves _will_ be singular seems hard... >> >And I still argue that we are arguing the same thing. If you read what I wrote >carefully you will see that this the negative rephrasing of my point. > >Regards Dan Andersson I won't argue there. Remember that in a message-board like this, it is possible to respond to the last person posting, but in a "discussion" mode to also "talk" to the person that posted prior to that. The _original_ poster talked about limiting SE using static criteria. That was the point I was responding to... That the idea doesn't "feel right" unless it is based on dynamic knowledge (IE no singular moves in the first 5 moves at a node, give up perhaps. Since that is dynamic in nature.
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.