Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 01:51:07 08/25/98
Go up one level in this thread
>Hi Ed, >Me and certainly some others too would like to see 2 senseful features: >1) when letting Rebel analyze a game (for example) it is unnecessairy wasting >time if the played move is the same as Rebel would play. I don't see the sense >in analyzing only this move again, it only wastes time I will see what I ca do. Rebel analyze a game and its moves in the following way: Stage one: Analyze what Rebel would have played (on the given time-level) Stage two: Analyze the actual move played (till the ply-depth of stage-one) Suggestion: after stage-one if "Rebel_move = move played in game" skip stage-two and copy analysis results from stage-one into stage-two. Is that what you want? In this respect remember that stage-two is much faster than stage-one. In stage-one all moves have to be searched. In stage-two only the "move played in the game" has to be searched till the given depth from stage-one. Stage-two is simply done by an internal "analysis include". As you know such a search is usually 3-5 times faster. So the real time gain is not much. But I assume that is not a good answer :) >2) you are right with your statement that Rebel starts to analyze a game when >Rebel comes out of book. But at least my version Rebel analyzing a database >Rebel starts thinking at move #1. This is of course not senseful, or am I >doing something wrong? You mix up "Analyze Game(s)" and "Analyze Database". Analyze Game(s) : Analyze full games (all moves) Analyze Database : Analyze positions (only the *first* move is analyzed) Also the output between "Analyze Game" and "Analyze Database" is quite different. - Ed -
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.