Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:46:36 06/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2001 at 12:20:36, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On June 19, 2001 at 12:08:36, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On June 19, 2001 at 12:05:33, Bas Hamstra wrote: >> >>>The Deep Blue clone FriarTuck >> >>I feel like the last few days of refuting Vincent's post here >>have been void. >> >>FriarTuck is crafty with singular extensions. Not Deep Blue. >>It runs 500Knps, not 200Mnps > >but my modifications have made crafty nearly as inefficient as deep blue >was searching. I'm not saying crafty is tactical as strong at the >same depth as DB was. What i'm saying is that the overhead it >requires to get near a depth n is more near the overhead of what DB >needed to get to a depth n, because nowadays very few who post >here can still imagine how bad those days were when one >didn't have nullmove and no shared hashtables. > >Best regards, >Vincent > >>-- >>GCP Vincent... give it up. I used null-move to win the 1983 WCCC tournament. It has been around for a _long_ time. Just because they chose to not use it doesn't mean they are stupid. They _chose_ to not use it. Just like I _choose_ to not use the double-null-move stuff because it isn't very efficient to do so... There is a difference between "choosing to not do something" and "not knowing enough to do something". A _big_ difference. This experiment is folly from front to back, and is pointless...
This page took 0.01 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.