Author: Georg v. Zimmermann
Date: 12:59:04 06/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
>I never thought that programs play that game without knowing what happens in the >other board. > >I think that the biggest problem is how to use knowledge about what happen in >the other board except times in a productive way. That is a big problem, very true .. I have spend considerable time pondering the possibilities. > > >>c) and this is probably the most important point: Bughouse largely depends on >>speed (I can explain if it isnt clear why so). It is pretty easy to make a >>program fast , doubling the speed only costs you 50 raw "elo". By making a >>program that takes only 100ms per move, I could create something very strong, >>which would be even more artificial. > > >I know that in a lot of games one player has a mate threat that cannot be >stopped and the opponent tries to save the game by not playing and hoping that >his partner is going to win. > >It is clear that this strategy can work only if the opponent of the parner has >not enough time to decide to stop playing and lose on time. > >Inspite of that it seems to me surprising if you can do the program stronger by >using 0.1 second per move because intuition tells me that the demage from >getting bad position by playing very fast is bigger because in this case you >will probably not get a position with unstoppable mate. > >Did you find that in comp-comp games the strategy of using 0.1 second per move >is a winner? I havnt played 2 vs. 2 computer games .. but my feeling tells me that would be the case. I used to be a pretty strong bughouse player myself (much better than chess where I used to be about 2200 fide). Georg
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.