Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: do we know WAC.230 is accurate?

Author: scott farrell

Date: 19:05:34 01/14/03

Go up one level in this thread


Do we know that if you play Rb4, that white has to take the sac?

If white doesnt have to take the Rook sac, then maybe there is no solution to
wac.230.

BTW: a few more minutes of thinking, and lots more fail lows, and the score has
dropped below 1.0. It likes Rb5 and Rh7 equally. I think both moves are equally
dumb.

ply 10=2.53
ply 11=2.35
ply 12=0.88
ply 13 partial=0.64 (still thinking at this ply)

The branching factor goes out the wazzooo as it starts detecting blockades, the
branching factor is around 11 now at ply 12, as a good move previously now shows
a draw, everything shows a draw, basically it is breaking down
null-move,alha-beta, everything, down to a straight brute force look at every
move.

Thinking more on your ideas on what to do on detecting lots of blockades. I
might experiment with turing things off like : nullmove, pruning, reductions, or
say moving null move to R=1 (I use R=2 normally).



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.