Author: blass uri
Date: 10:57:12 10/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 1998 at 13:04:53, John Coffey wrote: >On October 09, 1998 at 09:38:35, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 09, 1998 at 02:11:19, Jouni Uski wrote: >> >>>I have feeling, that using 3-5 pieces tablebases don't give any measurable >>>rating gain - may be 2-10 points maximum = no real gain. >>> >>>Jouni >> >> >>I would disagree here, as I see KRP vs KR regularly. In fact, in long >>games on ICC, I'd bet I see this about every 10 games or so. Lonnie >>can comment because he has played against Crafty a lot. And it is quite >>often for two computers to end up a pawn up or down, in the ending, and >>if one knows about this, it will win more, or draw when it should lose, >>than without them. >> >>ditto for endings like KRB vs KR... where it knows to trade into that >>when it can be drawn... > >Fritz5 has KRP vs KR and KQ vs KR. Not sure if it has anything else. > >I wanted to create a tablebase with all the possible K + 2 pawns (or less) >vs all the K + pawn positions. I figured that the number of possible positions >is around 489 million, but if I were to store it 2 bits per position >(win/loss/draw/unknown) then I could get it in 128 megs. I think that in this case it is not practical to do a draw by the 50 move rule and you can compute the move by regular search and only check that it is winning so it is a good idea. The question is what is the practical chance to do mistakes in other endgames if you use search and use tablebases only for win/loss/draw and for rejecting moves in the search I do not know if it is a good idea to store more information in the tablebases because the memory is limited Uri
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.