Author: Nagendra Singh Tomar
Date: 19:02:53 10/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 2002 at 21:22:57, Antonio Dieguez wrote: > >>I believe we do qsearch to see if there are any hidden surprises (a solution for >>the horizon effect). So the objective of doing a qsearch is to find whether the >>current positions score is really what we think or whether there is a big >>surprise which pulls it down drastically. So if we assume that the score is at >>least the static score then we are losing the advantages of qsearch, the reason >>at first place why we opted to do a qsearch > >'cuse me. > >what happens if there are no captures, you return the static score (I >suppose...) and clearly if the side to move has available captures then the >thing could only get cooler for it Not always.. At least not for forced-capture cases. let me explain forced capture. Suppose at the end of the extensive search (qsearch root) we have our rook(trapped or pinned to a higher value piece so that it is immobile) and suppose the opponent's pawn is attacking it. The attacking pawn is also guarded by another pawn. The only way for us to avoid losing our rook is to capture the atatcking pawn by say our knight. This is a forced capture. now in the next move the opponents other pawn will take our knight so we lose our knight to the opponent's pawn. In this case the capture is leading to a worse score than the static score. We can have many such cases during the search. Rook and pawn are just symbolic of a high value and low value piece. > >get fun. regds tomar
This page took 0.01 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.