Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 06:24:17 03/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 08, 2002 at 06:14:17, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On March 08, 2002 at 06:06:14, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>it completely unimportant to find the fastest mate. >>ANY mate would be good enough. > >You assume that the goal is to "win the game for position X" from whatever >position. For this goal, any mate is good enough to meet the goal. If someone >else's goal is to "find the fastest mate for position X", then only the fastest >mate is good enough. > >Sargon It also can mis mates on an earlier stage increased mating searches can make the program a lot stronger (It is for this reason why i keep hamering on the position Nimzowitsch-Alapin To find the move 0-0-0!!) a tactical player needs to know mate paterns But I also think that this could be solved it is only the programmer who knows how. Kingsafety does not mean give check when ever posible. most of the time it are the silent lockup moves before the checks which do the trick! Regards Marc
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.