Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 15:39:59 01/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2003 at 16:56:59, Bas Hamstra wrote: >>Yes, but of course before passing the attacked set back to the routine one >>should mask it with some appropriate allowed to move/capture set. >>May a piece capture a passers in eg. n <= 4 moves/captures, considering >>opposite null moves, except pushing the passer? What's the "best" way to >>develop a piece? Detecting trapped pieces, the flood stops after two >>iterations etc... > >I have played a bit with pawnstructures, keep pawns so that important squares >can be potentially dominated, while the opponent cannot. It is interesting but >in my case it lead to kind of ehm, "exotic" pawnstructures. some examples? The problem is to consider individual properties of each individual square of the remaining pawn sets (weak, passers). >Maybe bad tuning of >penalties, I don't know. But my experiences with this type of lookahead in >practical gameplay are not very encouraging so far. A good example of where it >does work, is Crafty's potential passer code (which BTW can be done loopless and >paralel for all pawns, with some fill routines). Do you actually use these kind >of ideas in your eval? Not yet, stil in research or early development state - first trials with passers... Gerd > >Bas.
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.