Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:25:16 09/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 16, 1998 at 12:09:31, blass uri wrote: >I believe a slow searcher can be better because you must have a slow searcher to >evaluate which lines are more important to analyze. > >I think that a slow searcher can be better also in test positions than fast >searcher because of this reason. > >What do you think about it? You can make a case for both. And, the final result I believe, will be *equal* results, eventually. Because the fast searcher will see more, the slow searcher will evaluate more to produce the same sort of result. Nothing convinces me (yet) that both a fast search and a good eval can't work together to produce good results. The search is likely to have fewer bugs, which might be important...
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.