Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 13:15:52 12/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 18, 2002 at 16:09:16, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On December 18, 2002 at 15:58:09, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>No, I claimed that for longer time controls the superiority of std R=2 over std >>R=3 is not that significant. But I never said that std R=3 is better than std >>R=2 under any time control. > >Your paper is on the verge of showing that R=3 is better than R=2. Less than >half the time, almost identical result, how could it be worse? Another "Vincentian" question! > >bruce
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.