Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:01:51 05/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 13, 2003 at 06:15:01, Eran wrote: >On May 13, 2003 at 04:33:12, Stefan Zipproth wrote: > >>>I understand your message above but you should add your code for under-promotion >>>to your future versions of Aristarch. If you prefer making an UCI-option that >>>would make your Aristarch support under-promotion, please do it. In either case, >>>your Aristarch would be "state of the art" and I would be happy to try it. >>> >>>Eran >> >> >>Why should I add it as a default? Why would it be "state of the art"? I think it >>would make Aristarch weaker. There are lots of other move classes that Aristarch >>never plays - I think this is okay because it makes Aristarch strong. I am sure >>that there are even professional engines that do under-promotion only in the >>first two plies. > >You are right. You are an expert in your Aristarch programming. I did not know >that adding under-promotion code or other move classes would make Aristarch >weaker. I am not a chess programmer. :)) What I did to you before was just a >suggestion and that was all. Anyway, I am impressed to hear that your Aristarch >plays stronger than Ruffian. Congratulations! > >Eran Stronger than Ruffian? Where did you hear it? 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.