Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:55:50 12/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 2002 at 06:41:25, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 08, 2002 at 21:18:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 08, 2002 at 13:40:55, Dieter Buerssner wrote: >> >>>On December 08, 2002 at 12:58:53, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>I think that Crafty or yace are better than every engine without tranposition >>>>table. >>> >>>Interesting comment. I wonder, how you came to this opinion. It may mean, that >>>something in the transposition table implementation of my program goes really >>>wrong. >>> >>>Regards, >>>Dieter >> >>I think that in endings, a non-transposition-table program will get out-searched >>so badly it will lose almost every one. Try fine-70 with and without to see >>what >>I mean, as a worst-case example... > >I believe that if you add programs the right knowledge they can solve fine-70 by >search without transposition table. I'm not convinced. It takes 23 plies to win the pawn. That is tough with no transposition table - try it... > >If they try to search 26 plies brute force search with no pruning and no >extensions then I expect them to have problems. If they _do_ prune the chances are high they will prune the wrong move. In a position like this one, what looks bad can actually be winning... > >I do not know about a single program with the right knowledge to solve fine 70 >without transposition table but it does not mean that there is no program. > >Uri Some have tried. Monty Newborn had a pawn-endgame-only program called "peasant." It couldn't do this one either...
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.