Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 01:53:23 09/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2001 at 20:17:19, Uri Blass wrote: >My assumption that it is impossible and I hope that you agree that if the number >of plies is big enough it is also impossible. Not at all! The whole idea of SE is if you are in a forced sequence that you see the ending of it NO MATTER HOW DEEP IT IS. You can over SIXTY ply deeper with SE. Easily. I know Robert even lost a championship gamesdue to this because he did not expect the program to go so deep and forgot to allocate memory to store those extra moves. >No >Having a +2 score is not a proof that it saw the win. >It may be also a bug in the evaluation. I find it more likely they saw the win rather than having a bug in the evaluation. They did win the game after all. >I start with the fact that most of the game moves before Bg5 does not seem to be >forced so the depth after Bg5 should be very small. *c5* Be4 *Ra6* Rb1 *f5* *Bc2* Rb7 *Bd8* *g6* The * moves are singular. I only see THREE that are not in this sequence, and in all cases Hiarcs disagreed with the move choices so they may very well not be considered singular by Hiarcs because it does not see that they are singularly better but DT obviously did. -- 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.