Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:51:13 11/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2002 at 22:41:06, Russell Reagan wrote: >On November 10, 2002 at 21:29:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>This means that 1/2 of the time, you will >>predict correctly and when your opponent moves, you have an instant response >>ready. > >Have you ever seen instances where one engine dominated another by always >pondering the correct move? I wonder how valuable this would be. For example one >example of why this might not be THAT effective, if you are essentially able to >search for twice as long (meaning you have double time odds), that's only worth >one extra ply if you're effective branching factor is 2, right? So most of the >time you won't even get an extra ply, and at the depths reached at tournament >depths, an extra ply might not even be decisive IF you were able to reach it. >So, how valuable is guessing the opponents move in practical play? > >Russell This is pretty common. What typically happens is that program A goes out of book first and does a normal search. Program B is doing nothing. A makes a move and starts pondering the right move. B starts searching. Every time B makes a move, A has been pondering the right thing and makes an instant move. But it is rare to predict 100%. So eventually A predicts the wrong move, B makes a move and now A has to think, while B ponders the right move. This kind of swing happens repeatedly during a game...
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.