Author: Tony Werten
Date: 23:40:14 06/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2001 at 18:38:30, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On June 19, 2001 at 12:46:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>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... > >Nah, where is your sense of humour? GianCarlo is just testing his CraftySE >implementation against Tao and it's doing all right. I must say I had expected a >SE Crafty without nullmove, but alas, no. > >A few impressions: > >It seems as if it plays more active than the standard Crafty. Also I have the >impression that it defends better against king attacks. The standard Crafty is >pretty blind for it and tends to panic. > >It won a few games by tactical shots. Tao won a few games by tactical shots. This is quite interesting. Does it mean that SE can overcome not using nullmove ? Is SE so strong or is NM so weak ? It depends on at least one thing. What is the normal result TAO get's against Crafty ? Tony >Mostly FriarTuck won endgames, when the SE were disabled and Tao sucks. Outcome: >6-2 for Deepest Blue. I hate to say it, but this proves clearly that Tao is >worse than Kasparow. > >Of course, in the light of my discussions here, I still do believe any SE >implementation WIHTHOUT nullmove (or similar pruning) is totally inefficient. > >As soon as GianCarlo beats Tao with his SE Crafty with nullmove disabled I will >retract that statement in public :-) > >Best regards, >Bas.
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.