Author: Antonio Dieguez
Date: 07:59:02 11/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2001 at 08:49:06, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 18, 2001 at 08:13:48, Jesper Antonsson wrote: > >>On November 18, 2001 at 05:06:24, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >>>>Otello, there is not enough information available for you to make such claims. >>> >>>Please see my answere here : >>>http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?197927 >> >>Well, you don't show anything there to back up the claims that their algorithms >>are outdated. No new revolutionary algorithms have been presented that would >>make DBs outdated, > >It is known that DB did not use the null move pruning. >The null move pruning was known in 1997 but they did not use it. > > and how complex/good their eval is we don't know. Since they >>could make complex eval for free in hardware, it might just be much better than >>todays micros. > >I do not believe that it was better than today micro. >I analyzed the games andthe fact that deeper blue could not see Qe3 in the pv of >game 1 suggest that their search rules and their evaluation was inferior. Hi. Do you know if Deep Blue consider a perpetual at the first repetition or the second?
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.