Author: Andrew Dados
Date: 19:08:38 12/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 18, 2002 at 22:00:08, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On December 18, 2002 at 21:48:03, Andrew Dados wrote: > >>On December 18, 2002 at 18:56:21, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On December 18, 2002 at 18:12:22, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>>On December 18, 2002 at 16:59:10, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>> >>>>>You take two numbers and draw a very general conclusion. Look at other tables >>>>>and depths, which show a more significant superiority of std R=2 over std R=3. >>>>> >>>>>Look at Tables 2 and 6. Vrfd R=3 solved almost the same number of positions as >>>>>std R=1 !!! Does it leave any room for doubt as for vrfd R=3's superiority over >>>>>std R=3 ? >>>> >>>>I don't see anything that shows demonstrated superiority of R=2 over R=3. You >>>>say to look at table 2 -- so do I. It shows that R=2 gets one more correct >>>>through ply 10, but take
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.