Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:01:34 09/25/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 25, 1998 at 18:43:17, Inmann Werner wrote: >You said, using fail lows in hash tables for move ordering is bad. I was not yet >convinced, but I tried two versions. That convinced me. The version not using >fail lows for move ordering is about 2% faster. > >Werner there are ways to make this sort of work. IE suppose at one depth you store a fail-high (which does have a best move). at another depth you store a fail low for the *same* position. You *could* save the old fail-high move (since it did go with this position) and use that. I did that in a very old version of Crafty, but haven't done this in a long time... But if you try to pick a move *at* the point of the fail-low and stuff in the hash table, I don't see where you can get it from... As you found... Bob BTW, your scientific methodology is *exactly* right. You should take *everything* with a grain of salt and try it, to be sure the results fit *your* program. Occasionally they won't...
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.