Author: K. Burcham
Date: 12:06:51 03/29/02
Chris here is the point I was making. I have found that most of the time, if the program is + in eval then it seems some programs move very fast. most of the time if the move shredder expects is played then shredder will move instantly. all programs are not like this. and i am not saying tiger time management is as bad as shredder. what i was trying to say, is that it seems programs do not allow for opponents clock. for example, if you see the opponent is taking 3 minutes per move playing an equal player and the program is taking 1 minute per move, this always worries me. other things being equal, I look at strength in depth. not always. not in every posiiton. but sometimes there is strength in depth. either due to hardware, or time allowed. (not talking about pruning for depth here). it seems to me that programs always think every position is very difficult. that programs think every position is very deep. programs will keep thinking deeper, even in a won position. GM's dont. GM's in some games will take 5-8 minutes per move. sometimes this means position is difficult. if i let my program make a 1 to 2 minute move, four times in a row, i could be in trouble. then five moves later the program eval starts to drop because the program played into a deeper -eval position then it allowed in its time control to see. most here have noticed that the time control, when a program sees eval go from +eval to -eval, will start to look for more +eval line, and take more time to do so. we do know some things about the programmers time control, and how you want to make sure time is allowed for (possible later played line) to show +eval. there are many others that also are aware of this. some players at ICC will not play an opponent that is making manual moves, because of their disadvantage with the auto play software. also there are several at chess.net and ICC that i can get points from about any time I want, only because of the manual moves, but i do not do this. this is really useful in a 5/5 game, because most programs play so fast in a 5/5 game, they play into losing position if opponent uses more time. i always feel that if there is a draw in long standard game, and both players have small but equal time left on clock, then it was a good game for time control. if i lose a game using a program, and i have lots of time left on clock, then my program game could have been stronger if i would have used more time. i dont want my program to wait until it sees its eval dropping, or until it sees a -eval to start taking more time per move. program time management is a skill that many gamers have learned at the game servers. i have lost several games because i let my program manage the time, while my opponent used up his clock and won. but----i have also lost several times in drawn or won positions because i ran out of time. this is the price you pay hoping eval will increase. anyway I know there are lots of people that agree with this, mostly gamers that know nothing about code and programming, and program time mangement. but i assume that there are also many that have not played this way that will disagree. so i will use Gambit Tiger as you recommend. and also I will set time control to 120 minutes. for this game I will not change clock in any way. Tiger will manage own time. agressive and anti-GM. kburcham
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.