Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 07:31:03 06/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 2002 at 07:49:58, James Swafford wrote: >On June 20, 2002 at 03:46:47, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >>On June 20, 2002 at 03:37:13, Tony Werten wrote: >> >>>On June 20, 2002 at 03:14:53, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>> >>>>Personally spoken, I prefer matches with ponder=off. And this due to an >>>>experiment made some years ago even played on_two_PC 486/86 with_two_programs at >>>>level 120 min/40 moves. The first match over 20 games was played with ponder=on, >>>>the second match [same openings] with ponder=off. And you will hardly believe >>>>it, but in the match with ponder=off the overall average search depth per move >>>>was higher than in the match with ponder=on. This seems to confirm what Dieter >>>>Buerssner wrote on this subject. He said that he would prefer to do his private >>>>tests with ponder=off as this method would use CPU time more efficiently because >>>>the CPU cycles for pondering on wrong moves are not wasted. Maybe someone should >>>>repeat such a test with the latest programs to have a good comparison between >>>>the various programs. >>> >>>I don't think you need tests. >>> >>>Suppose we have 100 cycles to spend for 2 moves. ( 1 own, 1 ponder ) >>> >>>with pondering on: >>> >>>you get 25 cycles for the first move, 25 for the second. Assuming pondering is >>>correct 75% of the time you get 25+(0.75*25)=43.75 cycles effectively. >>> >>>with pondering off: >>> >>>you get 50 cycles for the first move, 0 for the second=50 cycles effectively >>> >>>Tony >>> >>> >>>>Kurt >> >>Most intersting answer. Assuming that pondering is correct less than 75 % which >>in my opinion is more reliable, then I do not understand why a program should >>ponder at all. >>Kurt > >If you can make a good guess at your opponent's next move, and start thinking >about your reply, you'll save a lot of time over the course of the game. >Think about it - don't you play the same way over the board? You don't just >sit and read a book until your opponent makes a move, do you? :) > >-- >James There is another possibility. When playing in [human] tournaments, I made a habit of "putting on my opponent's hat" when it was his turn to move. [I never(!!) played against a female opponent. Never in my lifetime!] In fact, I often would get up out of my chair and stand behind my opponent so that I could see the board from his side. I was NOT trying to guess my opponent's next move. Instead, I was playing his side of the board. In other words, I was finding "my" move, with me in his shoes. This procedure was extremely helpful to me. It gave me a whole new perspective on the game. I'm unclear as to how that could be applied to computer chess, but if someone could figure out how to do so, it might help to produce better chess for the computer as it did for me. Bob D.
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.