Author: Kai Lübke
Date: 05:10:25 10/17/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 1998 at 05:53:25, blass uri wrote: >>** MChess played its games so far with "dynamic TB access" activated which is >>discouraged by Marty. It's likely it would have played better without it. > >I read in your site that it would have play better in endgames. > >The question is if it is relevant to the middle game >For example for the game between Junior5 and Mchess8 >I think that Junior won it in the middle game and not in the endgame >(when there are queen and rook and many pawns against 2 rooks and knight and >many pawns I do not call the position an endgame). Of course. That's why I state on my website that it cannot be inferred that MChess would have scored much better without this wrong setting. I believe Nimzo VS. MChess is another example where MChess lost in the middle game. In the endgame, I think it still had a faint chance to draw because of the TB's (was still around -2,30 while Nimzo was already at +7). My general observation was that except maybe for one case (against Tiger? don't remember), the game was already looking bad for MChess when the massive TB access kicked in. Also, I don't know how many of its won games can be attributed to the TB's. I just felt it was my responsibility to make clear that my wrong setting *may* have caused MChess to play worse than it should have. It would not be fair to Marty if I just say "who cares, it's no big difference anyway". >Did mchess use TB of 4-5 pieces endgames before it saw that it is losing in >this >game? Only 3- and 4-man set were used. I'm not 100% sure, but I think MChess' eval dropped way before heavy TB access kicked in, but not before the first TB access. --- Shep
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.