Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Null-Move: Difference between R = 2 and R = 3 in action

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 13:00:52 07/15/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 15, 2002 at 13:30:54, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:

>On July 15, 2002 at 13:11:09, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>Why does double null move prove that null move is a correct search method????
>>
>>Doing two null moves in a row means going back to standard search (a search not
>>involving an illegal move like null move is).
>>
>>I fail to see how it legitimates null move.
>
>I think the idea is simply to show that you can nullmove and still
>have a correct search. (but only with double nullmove, not single)

Here is how to use double null move:

Use your regular null move every place you are using it now (unless you use it
with in check or when zugzwang).

When something occurs where you would normally abandon null move, switch to
double null move instead.

In other words, we will never give it up completely, but (instead) switch to
double null move when things get dicey.

For sure, it is much better than abandoning it altogether, unless you know for
sure it should not be used at all in some particular situation.

E.g.:
Pieces get thin (pass below some threshold in points) --> instead of turning
null move off, switch to double null move.




This page took 0.06 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.