Author: Nagendra Singh Tomar
Date: 01:24:24 10/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 28, 2002 at 02:45:33, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 28, 2002 at 02:00:06, Nagendra Singh Tomar wrote: > >>On October 28, 2002 at 01:48:02, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >> >>>On October 28, 2002 at 01:17:41, Nagendra Singh Tomar wrote: >>> >>>>What all reasons can you think of for a ply 'n+1' searching lesser nodes than >>>>ply 'n' search. >>>> >>>>regds >>>>tomar >>> >>>The most obvious is a ply n search had really bad move ordering that gets much >>>improved for ply n+1 thanks to the hash moves saved in the hash table. >> >>correct. >> >>One more reason can ne that 'n' was just small enough to deny null-move. >>null-move in 'n+1' ply search saved a lot of nodes. > >I use null move from the first ply so there is not n that is small enough to >deny null move. > >The only case when I do not start by checking null move is when the remaining >depth is 0 or in some other special cases when I suspect a zugzwang. > >Uri But the idea behind null move is to try first with a lesser depth search and see if it fails high .. if you start null move search from first ply .. what is the "lesser depth" you are going to try for ply 1 and even 2 regds tomar
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.