Author: athlon2000
Date: 13:11:15 02/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 06, 2002 at 15:56:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 06, 2002 at 14:47:45, athlon2000 wrote: > >>On February 06, 2002 at 11:15:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On February 06, 2002 at 10:09:58, athlon2000 wrote: >>> >>>>Is shredders triple brain option any good to use against single chess program >>>>users? >>> >>>I wouldn't think it is particularly good to use it _anywhere_. Would you >>>prefer to have one engine thinking for X units of time, or three engines >>>thinking for X/3 units of time and then choose what appears to be best? >>> >>>I know _my_ answer... >> >>yes but wouldn't that mean three times the opening books and 3 different styles >>that will cover each others weakness? so in essence wouldn't it be = to one >>chess program... > > >Think about the _time_. If your branching factor is 3.0, then would you >prefer to have one program's analysis after a 12 ply search, or three programs' >analysis after 11 ply searches? > >How many times have you seen positions where one more ply was critical? > >How would you compare (say) a X ply search by (say) Fritz, to an X-1 ply >search by Hiarcs, Shredder and Junior? That is a difficult question and >I am pretty sure I would rather have the X ply search against another >computer. Against humans? Perhaps not. But then I would also want a >_strong_ operator to choose between the three moves, not a computer program. i understand what u r saying but in this fact i will have to respond with the fact that a friend of mine tested this option with three relatively moderate strength programs and managed to beat and draw most other programs without many losses...such as fritz junior chesstiger so on so forth.
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.