Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 13:41:56 08/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2001 at 16:35:46, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On August 07, 2001 at 16:03:34, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>I've often heard people state that null move with R=3 is better than with R=2, >>but I have never ever ever gotten a test result that indicates this. >> >>I've tried everything. I've tried it throughout the tree, I've tried it near >>the root, and I've tried it near the tips. >> >>My measurement standard is ECM positions solved, which *always* goes down. >> >>What are other people doing that I'm not doing, or are people testing in some >>other way, if so is their way better or worse? >> >>I would test Crafty both ways (it's currently doing R=3 some places), but my >>machines will be busy until after the WMCCC. >> >>bruce > >Singular Extensions perhaps? No, I don't think it's anything like that. I've been trying this for years. The very first thing that I did when I even discovered the concept of R=2, was try R=3 and R=4. That was a long time ago and my program was very simple. It didn't work then, either. bruce > >-- >GCP
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.